Holy books

[Guiscard]

ironically, since Muslims tend to have a distaste for Jews.

It's the other way round. Under muslim rule jews were never persecuted unlike what has been happening during last 50 or more years. I'd dislike too some one who took my land and is killing my people. Yes, i know things are more complicated but why can't u jews admit you're wrong? I also know i won't get anywhere with this discussion since i can see you're strongly biased.

QFT

[Neoteny]

ironically, since Muslims tend to have a distaste for Jews.

It's the other way round. Under muslim rule jews were never persecuted unlike what has been happening during last 50 or more years. I'd dislike too some one who took my land and is killing my people. Yes, i know things are more complicated but why can't u jews admit you're wrong? I also know i won't get anywhere with this discussion since i can see you're strongly biased.

Um... I'm not Jewish, and I hate all religions equally, so I'm not sure where that bias comes in. Jews have never been persecuted by Muslims? "Never" is such a strong word. Have you read the Qur'an? Mohammed himself is said to have slaughtered several Jewish tribes. And that's supposed to be the infallible word of god. Don't like Muslim sources? Here's a Jewish one.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Jews_in_Arab_lands_(gen).html

You'll have to copy and paste because I can't get the url tags to work for me today... so I just quoted it.

I may be biased, but you don't know what you're talking about. I realize that Muslim/Jewish relations aren't discussed in the bible, but things have happened in the last 2000 years or so. And Guiscard: I'm very disappointed in you.

[Guiscard]

ironically, since Muslims tend to have a distaste for Jews.

It's the other way round. Under muslim rule jews were never persecuted unlike what has been happening during last 50 or more years. I'd dislike too some one who took my land and is killing my people. Yes, i know things are more complicated but why can't u jews admit you're wrong? I also know i won't get anywhere with this discussion since i can see you're strongly biased.

Um... I'm not Jewish, and I hate all religions equally, so I'm not sure where that bias comes in. Jews have never been persecuted by Muslims? "Never" is such a strong word. Have you read the Qur'an? Mohammed himself is said to have slaughtered several Jewish tribes. And that's supposed to be the infallible word of god. Don't like Muslim sources? Here's a Jewish one.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Jews_in_Arab_lands_(gen).html

You'll have to copy and paste because I can't get the url tags to work for me today... so I just quoted it.

I may be biased, but you don't know what you're talking about. I realize that Muslim/Jewish relations aren't discussed in the bible, but things have happened in the last 2000 years or so. And Guiscard: I'm very disappointed in you.

Why? I'm a historian, primarily of the crusades. I've spent a lot of time studying the treatment of Jews by both Christians and Muslims. Although it is something of a generalisation, the Christian world treated Jews fairly abysmally whilst the Islamic world practiced a greater degree of toleration, and a lot of that was down to religious motivations. Upon the conquest of Jerusalem, the crusaders slaughtered the Jewish inhabitants. Richard the Lionheart, a romanticised English hero, declared he would have no Jews at his coronation and, indeed, when several Jewish leaders arrived to try and give him gifts and pay tribute he had them stripped, beaten and thrown out. This led to fairly major anti-Jewish pogroms in London and York. Martin Luther published a text entitled On Jews and Their Lies, which read 'base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth...devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine'...

Now I'm not saying that Islam was entirely innocent, there were certainly significant Jewish pogroms in Spain in the 11th century, but they were tolerated to a much greater degree than in western Europe. They were very rarely forced to convert, were generally allowed free practice of religion... intolerance of other religions is no more inherent to Islam than it is to Christianity.

Essentially, what I'm trying to illustrate is that the Islamic world had no particular issue with Judaism (indeed, Christianity had always suffered from more powerful anti-semitic sentiments) and that the current anti-semitic climate in the Arab and Persian world has much more to do with the (arguably) illegal operations of Israel. If the peoples who were allowed to settle in Isrsael and who then used military force to occupy and attempt to destroy the Muslim state already in existence had been, say, Buddhist then we'd get a great deal of anti-Buddhist sentiment in the Islamic world.

Muhammad fought many tribes, Pagan, Jewish... Islamic states and powers have fought amongst themselves for centuries... Does that make Muhammad anti-Islam as well?

As for your source, it seems to be rather general and biased. For example, the section of treatment of Dhimmi is pretty much wrong, and if not that certainly a gross generalisation. The imposition of distinctive clothing in Baghdad in the ninth century, for example, was a) Enforced very sparingly and b)the only documented case of this happening in the Islamic world at the time. It was certainly not general practice. I could elaborate on the rest of the points but you get my drift. Its a very biased source and not an accurate one whatsoever.

[MeDeFe]

Out of the given choices the only book that comes close to qualifying as holy (whatever that is) is definitely The Lord of the Rings.

[muy_thaiguy]

Just to add on to the Martin Luther thing, before basically saying what Hitler said about the Jews, he also said (before what Guiscard posted) that the Jews should be welcomed with open arms as brothers, then turns around calls them the evil of the world. He was known not only for starting Protestantism and the Luthern Church, but to also contradict himself.

[MeDeFe]

I think he was hoping that the jews would convert to protestantism since it was the "pure" Christianity. When they weren't interested he became a little irritated.

[muy_thaiguy]

I think he was hoping that the jews would convert to protestantism since it was the "pure" Christianity. When they weren't interested he became a little irritated.

A little?

[Simonov]

ironically, since Muslims tend to have a distaste for Jews.

It's the other way round. Under muslim rule jews were never persecuted unlike what has been happening during last 50 or more years. I'd dislike too some one who took my land and is killing my people. Yes, i know things are more complicated but why can't u jews admit you're wrong? I also know i won't get anywhere with this discussion since i can see you're strongly biased.

Um... I'm not Jewish, and I hate all religions equally, so I'm not sure where that bias comes in. Jews have never been persecuted by Muslims? "Never" is such a strong word. Have you read the Qur'an? Mohammed himself is said to have slaughtered several Jewish tribes. And that's supposed to be the infallible word of god. Don't like Muslim sources? Here's a Jewish one.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Jews_in_Arab_lands_(gen).html

You'll have to copy and paste because I can't get the url tags to work for me today... so I just quoted it.

I may be biased, but you don't know what you're talking about. I realize that Muslim/Jewish relations aren't discussed in the bible, but things have happened in the last 2000 years or so. And Guiscard: I'm very disappointed in you.

Why? I'm a historian, primarily of the crusades. I've spent a lot of time studying the treatment of Jews by both Christians and Muslims. Although it is something of a generalisation, the Christian world treated Jews fairly abysmally whilst the Islamic world practiced a greater degree of toleration, and a lot of that was down to religious motivations. Upon the conquest of Jerusalem, the crusaders slaughtered the Jewish inhabitants. Richard the Lionheart, a romanticised English hero, declared he would have no Jews at his coronation and, indeed, when several Jewish leaders arrived to try and give him gifts and pay tribute he had them stripped, beaten and thrown out. This led to fairly major anti-Jewish pogroms in London and York. Martin Luther published a text entitled On Jews and Their Lies, which read 'base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth...devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine'...

Now I'm not saying that Islam was entirely innocent, there were certainly significant Jewish pogroms in Spain in the 11th century, but they were tolerated to a much greater degree than in western Europe. They were very rarely forced to convert, were generally allowed free practice of religion... intolerance of other religions is no more inherent to Islam than it is to Christianity.

Essentially, what I'm trying to illustrate is that the Islamic world had no particular issue with Judaism (indeed, Christianity had always suffered from more powerful anti-semitic sentiments) and that the current anti-semitic climate in the Arab and Persian world has much more to do with the (arguably) illegal operations of Israel. If the peoples who were allowed to settle in Israel and who then used military force to occupy and attempt to destroy the Muslim state already in existence had been, say, Buddhist then we'd get a great deal of anti-Buddhist sentiment in the Islamic world.

Muhammad fought many tribes, Pagan, Jewish... Islamic states and powers have fought amongst themselves for centuries... Does that make Muhammad anti-Islam as well?

As for your source, it seems to be rather general and biased. For example, the section of treatment of Dhimmi is pretty much wrong, and if not that certainly a gross generalisation. The imposition of distinctive clothing in Baghdad in the ninth century, for example, was a) Enforced very sparingly and b)the only documented case of this happening in the Islamic world at the time. It was certainly not general practice. I could elaborate on the rest of the points but you get my drift. Its a very biased source and not an accurate one whatsoever.

Good point Guiscard.

[Minister Masket]

Ah yes, the Communist Manifisto. Now there's some light reading!

[got tonkaed]

And where, persay, is the Torah?

Old testament - just click Bible, no need to separate abrahamic faiths despite you naughty jews killed "our" god's son.

I take it that was a joke, because the Jew's had absolutely nothing to do with the death of jesus, except for the fact that he was born jewish.

though this may be an unnecessary distinction, im pretty certain that jewish groups and individuals did on a number of different levels play a role in the death of jesus, unless your using sources outside the bible to back up your statement there.

[Simonov]

On Origin of Species definitely.




I love old planet of apes movie!

[Haggis_McMutton]

Wait, you didn`t add The Hitchhiker`s Guide to the galaxy, The Alphabet of Manliness or The Gospel of the FSM?

BLASPHEMY

[Snorri1234]

Wait, you didn`t add The Hitchhiker`s Guide to the galaxy, The Alphabet of Manliness or The Gospel of the FSM?

BLASPHEMY

Totally.


Also, I picked Harry Potter even with the heavy christian morale.

And the Origin of Species isn't a holy book.

[Guiscard]

And where, persay, is the Torah?

Old testament - just click Bible, no need to separate abrahamic faiths despite you naughty jews killed "our" god's son.

I take it that was a joke, because the Jew's had absolutely nothing to do with the death of jesus, except for the fact that he was born jewish.

though this may be an unnecessary distinction, im pretty certain that jewish groups and individuals did on a number of different levels play a role in the death of jesus, unless your using sources outside the bible to back up your statement there.

It would have been fairly impossible for them not to have, to be honest.

[Chris7He]

Which of the following can be described as your holy book?

You forgot to mention the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[soundout9]

Which of the following can be described as your holy book?

You forgot to mention the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

GFY!!!!!!!!!

[Chris7He]

Which of the following can be described as your holy book?

You forgot to mention the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

I will not vote until you add that option.

[Neoteny]

ironically, since Muslims tend to have a distaste for Jews.

It's the other way round. Under muslim rule jews were never persecuted unlike what has been happening during last 50 or more years. I'd dislike too some one who took my land and is killing my people. Yes, i know things are more complicated but why can't u jews admit you're wrong? I also know i won't get anywhere with this discussion since i can see you're strongly biased.

Um... I'm not Jewish, and I hate all religions equally, so I'm not sure where that bias comes in. Jews have never been persecuted by Muslims? "Never" is such a strong word. Have you read the Qur'an? Mohammed himself is said to have slaughtered several Jewish tribes. And that's supposed to be the infallible word of god. Don't like Muslim sources? Here's a Jewish one.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Jews_in_Arab_lands_(gen).html

You'll have to copy and paste because I can't get the url tags to work for me today... so I just quoted it.

I may be biased, but you don't know what you're talking about. I realize that Muslim/Jewish relations aren't discussed in the bible, but things have happened in the last 2000 years or so. And Guiscard: I'm very disappointed in you.

Why? I'm a historian, primarily of the crusades. I've spent a lot of time studying the treatment of Jews by both Christians and Muslims. Although it is something of a generalisation, the Christian world treated Jews fairly abysmally whilst the Islamic world practiced a greater degree of toleration, and a lot of that was down to religious motivations. Upon the conquest of Jerusalem, the crusaders slaughtered the Jewish inhabitants. Richard the Lionheart, a romanticised English hero, declared he would have no Jews at his coronation and, indeed, when several Jewish leaders arrived to try and give him gifts and pay tribute he had them stripped, beaten and thrown out. This led to fairly major anti-Jewish pogroms in London and York. Martin Luther published a text entitled On Jews and Their Lies, which read 'base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth...devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine'...

Now I'm not saying that Islam was entirely innocent, there were certainly significant Jewish pogroms in Spain in the 11th century, but they were tolerated to a much greater degree than in western Europe. They were very rarely forced to convert, were generally allowed free practice of religion... intolerance of other religions is no more inherent to Islam than it is to Christianity.

Essentially, what I'm trying to illustrate is that the Islamic world had no particular issue with Judaism (indeed, Christianity had always suffered from more powerful anti-semitic sentiments) and that the current anti-semitic climate in the Arab and Persian world has much more to do with the (arguably) illegal operations of Israel. If the peoples who were allowed to settle in Isrsael and who then used military force to occupy and attempt to destroy the Muslim state already in existence had been, say, Buddhist then we'd get a great deal of anti-Buddhist sentiment in the Islamic world.

Muhammad fought many tribes, Pagan, Jewish... Islamic states and powers have fought amongst themselves for centuries... Does that make Muhammad anti-Islam as well?

As for your source, it seems to be rather general and biased. For example, the section of treatment of Dhimmi is pretty much wrong, and if not that certainly a gross generalisation. The imposition of distinctive clothing in Baghdad in the ninth century, for example, was a) Enforced very sparingly and b)the only documented case of this happening in the Islamic world at the time. It was certainly not general practice. I could elaborate on the rest of the points but you get my drift. Its a very biased source and not an accurate one whatsoever.

Meh, I'm not saying that my source wasn't biased, I noted that it was a Jewish source and used it to counter any Muslim bias from the Qur'an, and I didn't intend to say that the Jews were disliked more by Muslims than by any other people. Either way, the position of dhimmis in the Muslim world have never been equal to that of a Muslim, and I would say that they were actively repressed. My main point is that Simonov said "Under muslim rule jews were never persecuted." This is flat-out wrong. Plus, I'm well aware of the xenophobic tendencies of religion; it's one of the characteristics that pushed me away the hardest.

You say the Islamic world has no issue with Jews. However, the Qur'an is taken as the direct word of god in Islam. Saying that it was written by man is blasphemy. And what god says, goes. Now, here are some quotes from the Qur'an, plus some Christian bashing as a bonus:

5.51: "Believers, do not take Jews or Christians as friends They are but one another's friends. If anyone of you takes them for his friends, then he is surely one of them. God will not guide evil-doers."

9.29, 30: "Declare war upon those to whom the Scriptures were revealed but believe neither in God nor the Last Day, and who do not forbid that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who refuse to acknowledge the true religion until they pay the poll-tax without reservation and are totally subjugated.
"The Jews claim that Ezra is a son of God, and the Christians say, 'the Messiah is a son of God.' Those are their claims which do indeed resemble the sayings of the Infidels of Old. May God do battle with them! How they are deluded!"

So sayeth the lord.

I will concede that, depending on the translation, the harshness can be reduced, and a google search will give both sides. I got these verses from Why I Am Not A Muslim by Ibn Warraq. Guiscard, if you haven't already you should read it. He gives a review of Islamic scholarly inquiry and writes from the point of view of an ex-Muslim zealot. His resources are extensive, his logic convincing, and his past history is telling. My respect for scholarly inquiry leads me to take his side on most views. I highly recommend it.

EDIT: And I try to avoid the clusterfuck in Israel. It gives me a headache to think about it...

[mybike_yourface]

see, this is why daoism is so nice. everything is up for question and there's no holy books.

[Neoteny]

see, this is why daoism is so nice. everything is up for question and there's no holy books.

Same goes for atheism.

[Frigidus]

Wait, you didn`t add The Hitchhiker`s Guide to the galaxy, The Alphabet of Manliness or The Gospel of the FSM?

BLASPHEMY

That one is pretty much 26 holy books in 1.

[EvilPurpleMonkey]

Why isn't my holy book up there?

[Guiscard]

ironically, since Muslims tend to have a distaste for Jews.

It's the other way round. Under muslim rule jews were never persecuted unlike what has been happening during last 50 or more years. I'd dislike too some one who took my land and is killing my people. Yes, i know things are more complicated but why can't u jews admit you're wrong? I also know i won't get anywhere with this discussion since i can see you're strongly biased.

Um... I'm not Jewish, and I hate all religions equally, so I'm not sure where that bias comes in. Jews have never been persecuted by Muslims? "Never" is such a strong word. Have you read the Qur'an? Mohammed himself is said to have slaughtered several Jewish tribes. And that's supposed to be the infallible word of god. Don't like Muslim sources? Here's a Jewish one.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Jews_in_Arab_lands_(gen).html

You'll have to copy and paste because I can't get the url tags to work for me today... so I just quoted it.

I may be biased, but you don't know what you're talking about. I realize that Muslim/Jewish relations aren't discussed in the bible, but things have happened in the last 2000 years or so. And Guiscard: I'm very disappointed in you.

Why? I'm a historian, primarily of the crusades. I've spent a lot of time studying the treatment of Jews by both Christians and Muslims. Although it is something of a generalisation, the Christian world treated Jews fairly abysmally whilst the Islamic world practiced a greater degree of toleration, and a lot of that was down to religious motivations. Upon the conquest of Jerusalem, the crusaders slaughtered the Jewish inhabitants. Richard the Lionheart, a romanticised English hero, declared he would have no Jews at his coronation and, indeed, when several Jewish leaders arrived to try and give him gifts and pay tribute he had them stripped, beaten and thrown out. This led to fairly major anti-Jewish pogroms in London and York. Martin Luther published a text entitled On Jews and Their Lies, which read 'base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth...devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine'...

Now I'm not saying that Islam was entirely innocent, there were certainly significant Jewish pogroms in Spain in the 11th century, but they were tolerated to a much greater degree than in western Europe. They were very rarely forced to convert, were generally allowed free practice of religion... intolerance of other religions is no more inherent to Islam than it is to Christianity.

Essentially, what I'm trying to illustrate is that the Islamic world had no particular issue with Judaism (indeed, Christianity had always suffered from more powerful anti-semitic sentiments) and that the current anti-semitic climate in the Arab and Persian world has much more to do with the (arguably) illegal operations of Israel. If the peoples who were allowed to settle in Isrsael and who then used military force to occupy and attempt to destroy the Muslim state already in existence had been, say, Buddhist then we'd get a great deal of anti-Buddhist sentiment in the Islamic world.

Muhammad fought many tribes, Pagan, Jewish... Islamic states and powers have fought amongst themselves for centuries... Does that make Muhammad anti-Islam as well?

As for your source, it seems to be rather general and biased. For example, the section of treatment of Dhimmi is pretty much wrong, and if not that certainly a gross generalisation. The imposition of distinctive clothing in Baghdad in the ninth century, for example, was a) Enforced very sparingly and b)the only documented case of this happening in the Islamic world at the time. It was certainly not general practice. I could elaborate on the rest of the points but you get my drift. Its a very biased source and not an accurate one whatsoever.

Meh, I'm not saying that my source wasn't biased, I noted that it was a Jewish source and used it to counter any Muslim bias from the Qur'an, and I didn't intend to say that the Jews were disliked more by Muslims than by any other people. Either way, the position of dhimmis in the Muslim world have never been equal to that of a Muslim, and I would say that they were actively repressed. My main point is that Simonov said "Under muslim rule jews were never persecuted." This is flat-out wrong. Plus, I'm well aware of the xenophobic tendencies of religion; it's one of the characteristics that pushed me away the hardest.

You say the Islamic world has no issue with Jews. However, the Qur'an is taken as the direct word of god in Islam. Saying that it was written by man is blasphemy. And what god says, goes. Now, here are some quotes from the Qur'an, plus some Christian bashing as a bonus:

5.51: "Believers, do not take Jews or Christians as friends They are but one another's friends. If anyone of you takes them for his friends, then he is surely one of them. God will not guide evil-doers."

9.29, 30: "Declare war upon those to whom the Scriptures were revealed but believe neither in God nor the Last Day, and who do not forbid that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who refuse to acknowledge the true religion until they pay the poll-tax without reservation and are totally subjugated.
"The Jews claim that Ezra is a son of God, and the Christians say, 'the Messiah is a son of God.' Those are their claims which do indeed resemble the sayings of the Infidels of Old. May God do battle with them! How they are deluded!"

So sayeth the lord.

I will concede that, depending on the translation, the harshness can be reduced, and a google search will give both sides. I got these verses from Why I Am Not A Muslim by Ibn Warraq. Guiscard, if you haven't already you should read it. He gives a review of Islamic scholarly inquiry and writes from the point of view of an ex-Muslim zealot. His resources are extensive, his logic convincing, and his past history is telling. My respect for scholarly inquiry leads me to take his side on most views. I highly recommend it.

EDIT: And I try to avoid the clusterfuck in Israel. It gives me a headache to think about it...

WHat I'm trying to show is that, at least in the course of my research, I've found very little to indicate that the commandments in the Koran were ever taken at face value other than as propoganda in times of war. The Koran is certainly taken as the direct word of God, but the extent to which it is enacted is another matter. Muslims DID take Jews or Christians as friends. They worked and fought alongside one another, employed one another, were commanded by and commanded one another. One of the reasons the crusader states were able to even exist was the fact that the Muslim peasants simply accepted a change of master. Saladin, often helf up as the great promotor of Jihad and the uniter of Islam, was more than willing to consider a diplomatic compromise during the third crusade where certain areas could cme under joint and peaceful rule. There was nothing inherent in the interpetation of their religion current at the time which said they had to wipe every Jew and Christian off the face of the planet, just as the Christins didn't obey the letter of the law regarding papal justification to wage war on the Muslims. The Jews were no more repressed under Islamic rule in the Middle Ages than any minority group under any ruling power in a similar situation. Indeed, they probably enjoyed more freedom than the Muslim peasantry.

I am arguing this from my own knowledge, my own research and through my own academic enquirey... It is, indeed, my job...

[got tonkaed]

guis...in your last post to me are you arguing from the roman perspective their or the jewish one.

Just curious really, since the answer is probably both, i guess ive just always considered it on a practical level to be a consequence of the romans practices in governance.

And yeah, my vast (and i mean by guiscards standards, miniscule studying of religious history) understanding would suggest islam throughout much of its history was much more tolerant to people of the book as long as they paid the tax, than christans were of other religions.

[Skoffin]

Must... resist... lord of....the rings.

I canna do it, captain!