Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 09:47:39 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: Salvo Bartolotta <bartequi@neomedia.it> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Elden Fenison <moon_dog@spamcop.net>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Islam (was: Religions (was Re: helping victims of terror)) Message-ID: <20011022094739.F99042@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <1003661097.3bd2a72959115@webmail.neomedia.it>; from bartequi@neomedia.it on Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 12:44:57PM %2B0200 References: <1003617187.3bd1fba3d31ff@webmail.neomedia.it> <20011021101345.A28033@wantadilla.lemis.com> <1003661097.3bd2a72959115@webmail.neomedia.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday, 21 October 2001 at 12:44:57 +0200, Salvo Bartolotta wrote: > Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > >> On Sunday, 21 October 2001 at 0:33:07 +0200, Salvo Bartolotta wrote: >>> >>> I am not sure whether the same could be said of the Koran. >>> Recently, I have spoken with a few historians of religion, among >>> others. I was explicitly told that the "organic design" contained >>> in the Koran is one of the worst forms of _totalitarianism_. In >>> particular, the "moderate" parts in the Koran are only a means to an >>> end. >> >> I've tried to read the Quran, and I've found it very hard going. The >> Bible is a model of clarity by comparison. The Quran brings home very >> forcibly that its scribe was not a learned man. I don't think you can >> interpret much more into its form. > > By the way, as far as I can see on the 'Net for now, there WAS a > fine pre-islamic culture (which had points of contact with Veda). > Mr Muhammad felt it his duty to destroy that culture. > > The best-known example of this kind of attitude/behavio(u)r is the > destruction of Alexandria's library: thousands of scrolls (~ > 700.000?) were burnt -- because either they were in contradiction > with the Koran or they had the same contents as the Koran [sic!]. > Well, I'll have to RTFM on these topics before speaking. :-) Yes, you should have done. The library in Alexandria was burnt down in 412, hundreds of years before the birth of Mohammed, by Christian monks in the name of Christianity. http://members.iinet.net.au/~nicke/library/library.htm . >> You mean the Eastern story of the atrocities committed by >> Christians? Those were violent times. I don't think the Muslims >> something like 700were worse than the Christians. > > I was referring to Islamic atrocities in the East (eg India). I had > been reading some material about that on the 'Net (cf Hindu > Holocaust). l'll have to RTFM on this, too. :-) Yes, do that. >>> I now gather that, at a doctrinal level, there exists no "moderate" >>> Islam at all. >> >> Could you explain that? There may be fewer Muslims who just pay lip >> service to their religion than there are Christians, but I wouldn't >> even be sure about that. I grew up in Malaysia, a country with Islam >> as its state religion. While I don't approve at all of enforced >> religion (if you're Malay, you *must* be Muslim), until this Mulslim >> fundamentalism thing sprung up, I found Islam a very gentle religion. >> For most people, it still is. > > "Moderate interpreters" simply discard certain parts of the Koran. They do the same with the bible. Deuteronomy 7:1-3 When the LORD your God brings you to the land that you are about to invade and occupy, and He dislodges many nations before you--the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusiites, seven nations much larger than you---and the LORD your God delivers them to you and you defeat them, you must doom them to destruction: grant them no terms and give them no quarter. What does this mean if you interpret it literally? And you know there are dozens of such arguments. > Whence the image of gentle religion. Thus, however, they betray the > actual totalitarian doctrin underlying the Koran; fundamentalists > don't. This is a very one-sided argument. >>> Of course, strong political reasons make all western political >>> leaders speak of ahem "moderate Islam". >> >> As opposed to moderate Christianity or moderate Judaism? Members of >> all three religions continue to commit atrocities in the name of their >> religion. > > Christ != Muhammad Your point? > Bruno and Galileo (a _Catholic_ scientist) were well-known examples of > "Christian" intolerance. I am afraid this has nothing to do with what Christ > said, though. More generally, "Christian" misdoings have very little to do > with the NT. These so-called "Christians" were actually barbarians (cf eg the > crusades) -- of the worst kind. > > Religio instrumentum regni. In the Middle Ages (and later: cf Bruno, > Galileo), a number of "popes" applied this very ancient principle of politics. > > Incidentally, Matthew says: "Nolite possidere aurum neque argentum neque > pecuniam in zonis vestris non peram in via neque duas tunicas neque > calciamenta neque virgam dignus enim est operarius cibo suo [...]". This is > not exactly in harmony with the existence of a rich _State_ of the Church, > namely with "popes" pursuing _temporal_ power and interests. To the shame of > all Christianity per omnia saecula saeculorum. So what are you getting at? > By contrast, Islamic atrocities are in full harmony with what Mr > Muhammad himself, a very, erm, "gentle" prophet I didn't say that. > ("THE Prophet"), said, did, and wrote. Can you give me a quotation? Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011022094739.F99042>