A billion words have been written since Islam awoke from her 300-year slumber in 1983. Almost all of those words have sought to explain away the actions of ‘radical’ Islam. All of them straining, ever so hard, to make real the faux distinction between radicals and the so-called moderates of that religion. All to no avail. For none of those explanations, rationalizations, or dreams can square the circle. None can clearly explain why there should not be a blanket denunciation of this religion. For none of them clearly sees that there is only one Islam.
For just as the Muslims say that there is only one God, I say that there is only one Islam. The only distinction between any of their supposedly different strains is this: some Muslims are sleeping, while others are awake. But all Muslims have exactly the same DNA. All Muslims are intrinsically alike. For according to their book, they all have exactly the same mission. And that mission is jihad. Death to the infidel.
I’ve said before. There is only one Islam because there is only one Koran. And the Koran, unlike the Judeo/Christian Bible, has only one book. There is no New Testament to the Koran. There is no redemptive second book. There is no mercy in Islam. There is only the vengeance of Mohammed.
The only difference between any groupings of Islam is are they still sleeping, or are they already awake? That is, are they still passive, or have they entered into the active state? Are they still propagating while pretending to be docile? Are they still pretending to be nationalists first, last and always? Or have they finally dropped the pretense of assimilation, while triggering their explosive vests, taking out anyone, even their wives and children, as they seek the martyrdom of the damned?
There is only one Christianity, too, though there are many ways of imperfectly expressing this religious belief. Someone once said there are over 30,000 different individualistic Protestant sects. All of them set in uniform opposition to the communitarian one-ness of Catholicism. And often against each other.
Let’s simplify things and say Christianity is the belief in a God-Man named Jesus. And that Islam is the belief in a Prophet-Man named Mohammed.
If you can accept for the moment my simplistic definition of Christianity, then I would like to make my comparison of it to Islam. Remember, regardless of the fine details of defining dogma (which disqualifies Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses), my simplistic model means that there is only one Christianity. The question I wish to pose about Christianity then is not about the dogmatic differences amongst individual Christians. No, indeed, my question for Christians, of any stripe, is the exact same question I have posed about the supposed Islamic strains. And that question, again, is this: are you sleeping, or are you awake?
Are you snoozing in your comfy crib, with your binky and blanky, or are you on the march? Are you an infant, or are you a man? Are you really Christian? Do you really believe? Show me the proof. Are you on Crusade for your God? On the march, in any sense? Are you proselytizing for your God? The Muslims are. Can’t see the difference? Too bad. They do. They see it quite clearly.
Muslims, in a rare moment of rational lucidity, have concluded (as I have) that Christianity, for the most part, is asleep. So, why shouldn’t the Muslims laugh at the post-Christian inhabitants of Europe (and here) and conclude that these infidels have no love of any sky above them? For who can believe that any form of Christianity that slumbers is an actual religion worthy of respect? Or more simply put, is it even a religion at all? Don’t point to empty cathedrals. Show me a full one. Complete with children. Then I’ll listen.
I have to agree then with my Muslim opponents, at least at this core level of respect, that any religion is better than no religion. For any grouping of men that sees no One above them has therefore elevated themselves, by their willful blindness, to the level of the gods. No one atop Mt. Olympus looks up. They only look down. Onto mere men. In other words, we have become truly Godless gods. That means, in reality, that the Muslims are right, in this significant sense. We truly are infidels. We have no faith in anything other than ourselves. Who can blame the Muslims for their logic? And their laughter? Who are the real fools?
As I said, in their one moment of clarity, the Muslims have discerned the core signal that has awakened them. They have perceived that we don’t believe. Just as the locust somehow knows the time of it’s awakening, the Mohammedans have felt their moment. It is now. Time to arise, brethren! The world is ours for the taking. Burn that empty cathedral! After all, where is the danger?
Because, who will these slumbering Christians call upon when their days turn dark? Who will they take heart in, when their hearts have failed them? Who can save them, when they refuse to call upon anyone (other than the U.N.) to save them? Easy pickings, as they say. Saddle up, fellah. Paris is ours.
Let’s try to understand the adversary. But shouldn’t we really say, ‘the enemy’? And if you can’t say that word (enemy), you’re exactly who I’m talking about. Let’s try and see what explains the enemy’s actions. In short, let’s ask two terrible questions. Why does the West seemingly embrace Islam, and why is Islam so heartless?
The first question is rather easy. Why does the post-Christian West seem to be locked into an irresistible embrace of Islam, in spite of Islam’s harshness? Why would people who adore softness apparently be willing to welcome the hardness of Sharia Law? Why do they seem to embrace the certainty of their own destruction? What is it that could drive people to accept the very antithesis of their sweet dreams of secular social sanguinity? What is it about Islam that these Islamically-defined apostates could possibly desire?
Because they are apostates. Christian apostates. They have changed. They have evolved. They have denied Christianity, in any aspect of its real, unchangeable form. These apostates, like the Muslims, have also detected the silent signal of their day, that Islam is the only force that might be able to destroy True Christianity. At least, that is their hope.
At bottom, the only thing that worldly post-western people fear is Christianity. Real and awakened Christianity. First, because it calls them to acknowledge their sins. Their personal sins. Not ‘group sins’ like the carbon footprint and white privilege. They’re happy to claim those social sins, as long as it is ascribed to a group, and not to them personally. After all, even Nancy has a wall around her house. Hers is for aesthetics, of course. Not racism. Or xenophobia.
Sin is not what perturbs them most about Christianity. The part they really can’t take is repentance. Personal ownership of personal sin, followed by personal remorse. Shameless people cannot abide this thought. For true shame will bring true self-denial. This thought is the only thing they will deny themselves.
Islam, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to have this same shame-based demand. After all, in Islam, all your sins go away if you simply murder someone who has failed to praise Mohammed. So, in the wimpy, emasculated Western secular world, as far as deciding who your real enemy is, it’s either Christianity or Islam. Guess who wins the ‘most-hated’ award?
This is the crucial distinction. In Christianity, God says ‘vengeance is mine’. The god of Islam says ‘vengeance is yours’. Since Mohammed claims to have Allah’s power-of-attorney, he feels totally free to act on Allah’s behalf. Thus he exhorts his followers, go ahead, push that button! Who will be the messenger of God? Who will exact the toll? Man or God? Mohammed or Jesus? That’s what it all comes down to. Who will defend the honor and justice of The Father? And how will they do it? Who, in this relentless demand for His justice, will be given mercy?
The question for each individual is will The Father wreak vengeance upon everyone, or will He be pleased to grant mercy? And if He will grant mercy, who will be his agent? Jesus or Mohammed (and his clones)? Which one has shown us the way of mercy? Which one has called us to willing repentance without condemning us to Hell? Which one says ‘Go, and sin no more’? The answer, after the last 1400 years of comparison, is perfectly clear.
It seems rather academic to compare the mercy of Christianity to that of Mohammed. That then leads us to the logical question of ‘Why’?
Why is there no mercy in Islam? Short of the ‘point of the sword’ reward, that is. Why is it that Islam sees no humanity in their enemies? Why do they insist upon forced conversion? How can this please their god? What does it say about him? And his prophet?
Let’s look at what has removed the concept of love (and therefore, mercy) for our enemies, from the heart of Mohammed and his god. Let’s look at what really separates the monotheism of Islam from that of Christianity. Let us see why the monotheism of Christianity and Islam are totally different. Totally and diametrically opposed. They do not share the same God. Isaac and Ishmael are not true brothers.
I asked earlier why Mohammedans can see no humanity in their enemies. The answer is simple. They can’t see it in themselves, so how could they possibly recognize it in another? Am I saying that Muslims are not human? The hard but true answer is ‘yes’. Wait! Didn’t God create all of us in His own image and likeness? Well, of course He did! And He left it up to us to preserve that image. Which we have failed (all of us) to do. In that regard, we are all inhuman. The question today is, what is it that can totally remove that image and replace it with another? With an image of The Beast? The heartless beast. But even a beast has the instinct for survival. No beast would willingly kill himself, under any circumstance. They may die protecting their young or their mate. But never to kill them, along with themselves. No dumb animal is that dumb.
No, there is something deeper at work here. Something that moves men to go beneath the beastly. Something that drives them to embrace The Beast himself. The demonic beast. Let’s look at what this change requires to be accomplished. And why Islam is not human. Nor humane.
After much study of Islamic history and their book, I believe that we can see four distinct traits at work in the Islamic heart. Four things that have actually removed their heart. Things that have reduced Allah’s believers to the level of the automaton. After all, who but a machine could accept the programming that calls them to destroy themselves and others, in their pietistic rebuke of the lack of perfection in their neighbor? What kind of god would demand that these flesh-and-blood automatons trigger that explosive vest in the pursuit of anyone’s else’s perfection?
In my book, I examined and compared the three main religions of monotheism, based upon a five-point standard. In the section on Islam, I prefaced this examination with these remarks:
“First of all, I want to make a few comments about the Koran, and its ‘author’. After much study and thought, here is what I have distilled about Islam, as it is related in the Koran;
- It’s schizophrenic (but not in the way normally understood by shrinks):
- It’s xenophobic (but in a calculated way, to defy definitive interpretation);
- It’s robotic (in that man is programmed to react, without rationally thinking);
- It’s hypnotic (in that the bulk of it is a constant repetition of about 10 phrases).”
Next, we look at each of these points, and ponder them.
Islam began to wake up in 1975, with the Lebanese civil war. For those who don’t remember, Lebanon used to be a majority Christian nation.
Then came the Iranian revolution in 1979. That kicked the covers off and poured water on the dormant. The sleeper had awoken.
Wow! Watt should stick to Russian allegories. At least he appears to know his sources better on that subject.
On this subject, Watt simply regurgitates neocons’ uninformed babbling to incite hatred and justify their never-ending war for their foreign client in the Middle East. He’s using sources that are fundamentally twisted, and his own analysis is either based on unreal ignorance, or naive acceptance of completely biased sources.
Not enough time for a thorough commentary. Let a few examples suffice:
“For according to their book, they all have exactly the same mission. And that mission is jihad. Death to the infidel.”
Becoming a Muslim is a pact between a person and God. To become a Muslim, one must believe and affirm that belief: I believe there is only one God. And I believe that Mohammed was his messenger.
Period. Nothing about jihad. Nothing about infidels.
The life of a Muslim is guided by the 5 pillars of Islam:
1. Belief (see above)
2. Prayer
3. Fasting
4. Charity
5. Pilgrimage
That is the essence of the life of a Muslim. Period. Nothing about jihad. Nothing about infidels.
Islam, unlike Christianity, affirms the essence of mankind’s corporeality. Men are of the earth. God put mankind on earth to enjoy the fruits of his creation. Within the guidelines provided by God, mankind celebrates life and living. Humans are created in God’s image.
In addition, Islam acknowledges that men have rights and responsibilities. Those include protecting themselves, their families, and their kin from attacks. In Islam, there is no hypocritical striving for some sort of passive martyrdom–there is no “Turn the other cheek.” There is an acceptance of the nature of mankind that God created–sometimes one must take harsh actions to protect yourself and your kin. Those actions are required, not hypocritically condemned. Warriors who protect their Islamic brethren are celebrated forthrightly, with no tinge of guilt or hypocrisy.
Christianity, on the other hand, is caught in a theoretical and practical conundrum, a rhetorical cul de sac with no escape. In order to further the interests of their culture and fellows, Christianity preaches and honors an unreal message–self-abnegation, passivity, turn-the-other-cheek, poverty, chastity, rejection of earthly reality and existence, meek-inheriting-earth–yet pursues the exact opposite, in the real world–aggressive spreading of the Christian culture, death to infidels (examine Christian history, Dr. Watt), pitiless extermination of enemies while piously preaching peace, love, and good will to men.
“After all, in Islam, all your sins go away if you simply murder someone who has failed to praise Mohammed.”
What? Where could you have possibly dredged that up? There may be a demented commentator who said such a thing, but that is not Islam. Just as Jim Jones is not Christianity, neither is your comment Islam.
“There is only one Islam because there is only one Koran. And the Koran, unlike the Judeo/Christian Bible, has only one book. There is no New Testament to the Koran.”
Again, you’re relying on ignorance or naively following twisted analysts who have ulterior motives.
After you’ve learned history–with the Sunni-Shia split, the Shia interpretation of the role of non-prophet men in their religion, “saints” and their prolific writings–books of interpretation and guidance that are comparable to the Christian New Testament–get back to us. Then, consider Sufism, which focuses on the spiritual essence of God, as opposed to Sunni and Shias’ focus on the practical, visible elements and practices.
In the meantime, rest assured, that outside the neocons’ vile hatred, there are a multitude of interpretations and variations of how Islam is implemented and lived. Many have names and are well-known, many are complex layers of culture, unique to certain nations and people. The foundation of your commentary rests on a rotten edifice, and collapses before you can even begin to build it.
“There is no mercy in Islam.”
Again, you’re following a demented Pied Piper, who is either deluded or willfully deceitful. Every Muslim prayer begins with “In the name of God, the entirely Merciful, the especially Merciful…”
It is God who is merciful. God is the essence of mercy. That is the essence of the religion–mercy. Mercy is in the heart of all men. Yet God also allows Muslims to protect, defend, and attack their enemies. And to show mercy, when it is possible, in the prosecution of that defense. No hypocrisy. Just a basic belief in mercy, but a forthright acknowledgement that it is permissible to use force when needed.
“Or have they finally dropped the pretense of assimilation, while triggering their explosive vests, taking out anyone, even their wives and children, as they seek the martyrdom of the damned?”
Suicide is among the worst sins in Islam. The proliferation of suicide attacks–after 1948–and Muslims who justify suicide while attacking an enemy as a tactic, is clearly a response to helplessness. Suicide, in all instances, is a sin in Islam. Martydom, dying while fighting for one’s fellows, is celebrated and rewarded in Islam. The political reality of subjugation drives people to desperate measures. Manipulative fanatics create justifications for the most vile of all sins. Those facts do not change the reality of Muslim suicide bombings, but there is no glory in suicide in Islam, only sin and condemnation. Again, Watt parrots deluded or hateful deceivers in such commentary.
“That means, in reality, that the Muslims are right, in this significant sense. We truly are infidels. We have no faith in anything other than ourselves. Who can blame the Muslims for their logic? And their laughter? Who are the real fools?”
And finally, Watt stumbles into the light. This is what you should be focusing on–examine the log in your own eye. Not the mote you think you see in your “opponent’s” eye. Western cultures, the highest achievements of mankind, built on the foundation of Anglo-Saxon Protestant beliefs and practices, are in the final throes of self-destruction. Their thrashing as they expire throws debris and waves of destruction around the globe. Some poor fools, deluded and led by deceivers, fix on an enemy of a foreign power, and parrot hatred of that enemy, all the while drowning in their own delusions and self-immolation on the pyre of their own dying religious traditions. Much better, Dr Watt, to examine the expiration of Christian beliefs and practices, and the expiration of the secular culture that grew and prospered, nurtured by that spiritual legacy.
“Why would people who adore softness apparently be willing to welcome the hardness of Sharia Law?”
Again, you’re being led by either deceit or delusion. Please show an example of a PC-Progressive who “welcomes Sharia,” or who is living under Sharia. This is nonsense fed to you be neocon propaganda masters. There are no PC-Progressives who live under Sharia. PC-Prog beliefs are against Normal-American culture. Thus, they hate Christianity. Anything that is “Not Christian” or that is anti-Christian is celebrated. The old tenet “My enemy’s enemy is my friend.” is what the PC-Progs are following here. Islam is “Not Christian,” therefore PC-Progs celebrate it–totally unaware of what Islam is, or of the geopolitical struggles Islamic cultures are engaged in against the neocon representatives of America. No PC-Progs are longing for, or living under, Sharia.
Religious civil law is accepted and accommodated in America. Jewish law, Mormon law, Amish law, Christian law, and many others, depending on the population density, are accommodated in communities all across America. This is not “welcoming Sharia,” it is the nature of our democratic republic.
“Why do they insist upon forced conversion? How can this please their god? What does it say about him? And his prophet?”
Again, selective delusion and/or deceit. Christianity has a history of forced conversions of “infidels” equal to, or greater than Islam. Again, read up on history and get back to us. Especially your beloved Russian history, but also from the very beginnings of Roman Catholicism. Throughout Europe pagans were forcibly converted from the earliest days of organized Christianity. Jews and Muslims, living in Christian lands, or conquered by Christians, have been forcibly converted for centuries, all approved of and enforced by the highest clerics. Indians in the Americas, especially those subject to Catholic rule, were forcibly converted. The first Russian ruler to accept Christianity forced a mass baptism of all his subjects. And on, and on… Islamic despots have committed the same sins as the Christian despots. There is nothing unique here. Again, the log in your own eye….
“After much study of Islamic history and their book, I believe that we can see four distinct traits at work in the Islamic heart. Four things that have actually removed their heart. Things that have reduced Allah’s believers to the level of the automaton.”
Wow, this will have to suffice for the present, but the only response possible here is: Dude, you need to get out more. Travel the world. See reality. Get your head out of books and break the vile hold that your sources have on you. Visit an Islamic culture. Spend a month, three months, a year in an Islamic culture. Try Kuala Lumpur. Or Jakarta. Or Dubai. Then come back and revisit your nonsensical and deluded commentary.
Thanks.
Kent-
Wow, you’re pretty touchy, eh? Here’s your problem, in a nutshell- your own closing lines:
“Visit an Islamic culture. Spend a month, three months, a year in an Islamic culture. Try Kuala Lumpur. Or Jakarta. Or Dubai. Then come back and revisit your nonsensical and deluded commentary. ”
Sure, Kent. Now try doing exactly that as an openly-practising Christian. Try it in Mecca, too. Complete with openly witnessing for your faith. Then we’ll see who’s deluded.
John,
Not touchy at all. Just reality based, with decades of experience in the real world. And intolerant of aggressive ignorance and delusion. Happy to help, though.
“Sure, Kent. Now try doing exactly that as an openly-practising Christian. Try it in Mecca, too. Complete with openly witnessing for your faith. Then we’ll see who’s deluded.”
Sure, John. Do that.
In the places I suggested.
Because, as Watt, in his cozy delusion, fed on neocon hatred, fails to understand there is no monolithic “Islam” about which you can pontificate and generalize.
Islam, like all religions, varies according to the cultural milieu in which it is practiced.
Again, spend two weeks, a month, a year, in the places I suggested, as a Christian, with your eyes open.
Sure, if you go in with an antagonistic approach–to proselytize or evangelize or with conversions of infidels in mind–you’ll have a completely different experience.
As for Mecca, how would a Muslim be treated who went into the Vatican and “openly witnessed” for their faith. Get real.
Part of the delusion, apparently, must come from failure to travel the world and see what reality is like. That would require the traveler to be open to the culture of the destination. Sitting at home and reading neocon nonsense about “murderous Islam” blinds one to reality. When you visit another culture, decency and humility require respect of the locals. If instead you visit another culture with hatred, contempt and ignorance informing your visit, you may as well stay home and read the Weekly Standard.
Islam in Indonesia varies from Islam in Saudi Arabia the same as Christianity in Sweden varies from Christianity in Uganda. If in your fevered imagination they are all monolithic, then you’re missing out on the glories of reality.
You oughta get out more.
Christianity in Dubai:
https://www.uaeresults.com/Churches/Dubai/
Christianity in Malaysia:
https://www.malaysia-traveller.com/malaysian-churches.html
Churches in Indonesia:
https://factsofindonesia.com/largest-church-in-indonesia
The notion there is one Islam seems troublesome when one considers Israel and Sunni Islam (Saudi Arabia) conspiring against Shi’ite Islam (Iran).
But then, Israel is not Christian, and not very powerfull, so Islam might be united against the Post-Christian West, and not against the other religion of the Book.
Ok an interesting opening there Ianto, though I would have to look more into your second or third parts here to get fully where you’re coming from.
“There is only one Christianity, too”
And its only practitioner was called Jesus Christ.
“Let’s simplify things and say Christianity is the belief in a God-Man named Jesus. And that Islam is the belief in a Prophet-Man named Mohammed.”
Let’s not, although I recognize that you must start somewhere with some sort of definition!
Jesus had enemies. They believed in him. They were never Christians. The essential ingredient is not belief, but obedience to laws and principles established by Jesus, which sometimes requires some wisdom or judgment as to when to obey what. Is today the day I sell a garment and buy a sword? Shall I turn the other cheek? I have only two of course and after that out comes the sword.
“which disqualifies Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses”
I wonder what part of “judge not” you don’t understand. For sure, I judge things all the time but then I rarely pronounce myself as either a Christian or an expert on what the word means.
We’ll be coming back to these two religions.
“are you sleeping, or are you awake?”
The question is idiotic. Suppose you are sleeping, and in your dream someone asks, “are you awake?” and in your dream you say, “Yes, of course I am awake, thank you for asking, not that it is any of your business!”
“Are you proselytizing for your God?”
That pretty much leaves the aforementioned Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses in the forefront of obedience, but I’m not sure exactly where Jesus commanded proselytizing.
“Don’t point to empty cathedrals. Show me a full one. Complete with children. Then I’ll listen.”
Sounds a bit like Lucifer tempting Jesus to jump off the top of a cathedral to prove he was the son of God. There is no necessity to prove to Lucifer and no necessity to prove to you.
Sheep know their shepherd’s voice and do not require to see full cathedrals.
“Why does the West seemingly embrace Islam, and why is Islam so heartless?”
Those are two very different questions. As to the first, it seems most westerners see Muslims as a RACE and have become “woke” or race conscious, accepting among themselves a demand similar to your demand, to prove my virtue I must do “X” and you are my judge.
As to heartless; that’s oversimplification. Islam places considerable “heart” on family but not on enemies as Kent above goes into in excruciating detail.
“At bottom, the only thing that worldly post-western people fear is Christianity. Real and awakened Christianity.”
Aka, Mormonism; which brought upon itself the wrath of the United States government and the ACLU (and still does).
“The question for each individual is will The Father wreak vengeance upon everyone, or will He be pleased to grant mercy?”
Yes to both, depending pretty much on which you prefer. Mercy must be requested.
“I asked earlier why Mohammedans can see no humanity in their enemies.”
It’s probably irrelevant. They notice you are wearing blue jeans. So what? They notice your humanity. So what? Learn the magic words and live or be a Christian martyr for what that’s worth; won’t be 40 virgins waiting for you (and I think nobody said what gender they would be).
For what its worth, there has been some testing of the waters to use a figure of speech.
“One girl talks about martyrs sacrificing their lives without hesitation to conquer Jerusalem. ‘We will defend the land of divine guidance with our bodies, and we will sacrifice our souls without hesitation,’ a second girl says. ‘We will chop off their heads, and we will liberate the sorrowful and exalted Al-Aqsa Mosque. We will lead the army of Allah fulfilling His promise, and we will subject them to eternal torture.’”
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/philadelphia-muslim-children/
Wow! Are some people ever defensive of Islam! Our goose is cooked, Ianto!
Faith,
Wow! Reality must be really scary!
My responses to Watt’s ignorant assertions are factual.
Happy to debate/discuss any points that you believe are not factual, or open to interpretation.
It’s a big world out there. Life is too short to waste tilting windmills.
Instead of basing your opinions on silly and ignorant fantasies, or hateful generalizations propagated by those with ulterior motives, take a taste of reality. Be careful, though, the shock is likely to be great.
Take the red pill. Open your eyes!
@Kent Clizbe
There are lots of people not happy with Islam, and, given they live in Europe, changes are they are not against Islam because of internal American politics.
Europe and Islam have a history, with Islam trying to conquer Europe, and Islam pirates abducting people to sell as slaves. Europe fought back, which should not surprise anybody.
Currently certain areas with lots of Muslim immigrants are becomimg no-go areas. The Paris banlieus are quite famous, and nobody in his right mind is visiting those places when they are in Paris. In the Netherlands the Moroccan crime syndicats in Amsterdam don’t care at all about human lives anymore, happily shooting each other with no regard for innocent bystanders. Or they cut people’s heads of and leave these as a sign on the street.
People are against Islam because of Muslim actions. It is as simple as that.
Kent, I have spent a great deal of time in Kuala Lumpur.
They do not allow ethnic Malaysians to convert to Christianity. They also do not allow ethnic Malaysians to marry outside of “their” religion. When Lina Joy appealed to have her official religion changed to Christian so she could marry an Indian Christian, she not only was refused, she and her lawyer became a target of angry mobs chanting for her death.
Malaysia was forced into a British-style constitution, which is why they have any semblance of freedom of speech and religion (such as it is.) But to circumnavigate this, they force Muslims to be accountable to a parallel Sharia court system that is not subject to the constitution. Remember, all ethnic Malaysians are considered Muslims, under penalty of law.
The Malaysian government also persecutes non-Muslim indigenous tribes, paying Muslim men large sums of money for marrying them and converting them.
To say nothing of the general corruption, child labor, and slavery rampant in Malaysia.
You’re right about one thing though, they are just about the best example of a modern, tolerant Islamic nation you could go with. If you stick to the touristy areas you’ll see cool buildings and trains and women with jobs and stuff!
Don’t be a tool.
Kent’s lack of curiosity is astounding.
“Look, there are churches, and some diversity of thought, and a little bit of women’s rights in these giant cities in Muslim countries where tons of foreigners live! How can you possibly think Islam isn’t beautiful and enlightened?”
He is also lying about Islam only requiring that you “believe in one God and Mohammed his prophet.” There are hundreds of rules in Islam, disobedience to which make one an apostate. You have to accept that Mohammed never sinned and lived the perfect example of a life for Muslims to follow. This is problematic, seeing as Mohammed married a 9-year old, waged constant war against innocent people, killed people who disrespected him, owned and castrated African slaves, and had a harem of wives and sex slaves (there is disagreement over exactly how many of each, given the blurred lines there.) He also commanded his followers to wage continuous jihad until Islam had subdued the world. These are fundamental tenants of the Islamic faith, and will continue to be so, given the immutability of Islamic scriptures.
There is a reason why “awake” Muslims are unwilling to disavow or denounce the above behavior.
Isaac,
Interesting thoughts. But totally dishonest and inept.
First: these little squiggles on the page–“…”–we call them “quotation marks.” They mean something. They mean that everything that is placed between them is a “quotation.” They are the way we indicate that we are writing something that someone else said.
Your commenting on my lack of curiosity, followed by a phrase in quotation marks, implies that you are quoting my words. Please note, those are neither my words, my thoughts, nor my sentiments.
I provided quite a few words that you could have quoted, and quite a bit of implied meaning. You apparently grasped neither.
As for curiosity, an abundance of that is probably one of my many faults–I definitely do NOT suffer from a lack of it.
My curiosity has led me to spend years in foreign countries, doing dirty work in dirty places against dirty people. I’ve lived with, worked with, worked for, played with, ate with, got to know and love, and hate a variety of people and cultures on 4 continents in many countries. I’ve been immersed in Christian, Buddhist, Confucian, Catholic, Protestant, atheist, Sunni, Shia, and other religious cultures.
My worldview is 100% reality and experience-based. I’ve lived it. I’ve seen it. I’ve touched it. All thanks to my driving curiosity.
On the other hand, it’s clear that your head has been filled with hatred and confusion, totally unrelated to reality. Instead of absorbing nonsense from those with ulterior motives, try getting out (be curious!) and live in the real world.
Your ignorant mis-characterizations will fade away. Careful, though. You’ll learn some things about yourself, and your own culture, that will scare you. Look in the mirror.
Isaac,
First, keep a civil tongue in your head. I’ve never been a tool.
Second, before you spout off on an issue, get to know it.
There is no such thing as ethnic “Malaysian.”
You are evidently referring to “Malay.”
Malay is the race. Malaysian is the nationality. There are three main races with Malaysian nationality: Malay, Chinese, and Indian.
Third, I referred Watt to three majority Muslim countries as counter-examples to his feverish imaginings of the hell on earth that his sources tell him Islam creates.
As for your descriptions of religious issues, marrying outside the faith, etc. in Malaysia, none of that rises to Watt’s hysterical imaginings of what Islam is about, for example:
“After all, in Islam, all your sins go away if you simply murder someone who has failed to praise Mohammed.”
Since you apparently spent time in Malaysia, among the Muslims (or at least you saw some), how often did you see a Muslim murder someone who failed to praise Mohammed?
What you saw in Malaysia was an unbelievably working multi-ethnic, multi-religious country. The dangers of having three major races, and three major religions mixed together, sharing power–political and economic–is nothing short of miraculous. All make compromises. None are totally happy. There are injustices. But this is the nature of humanity–not Islam.
Want to make a real comparison of the real-world effects of religion and culture?
Leave KL and hop over to Manila. Which is a better place to live?
Which comes closer to being a hellhole? Which is Christian? Which is Islamic?
Real world. Reality.
Isaac,
Thanks for bringing up Malaysia. It is a perfect example of how much the real world is different from the fevered visions of hatred pumped out by those with ulterior motives.
In your blinkered and blinded view, Malaysia is apparently a hellhole of Islamic malfeasance. Meanwhile, in the real world, Christian Westerners vie to qualify for an IMMIGRANT visa program, so they can move to, and live in, Malaysia.
It’s called “Malaysia–My Second Home.” They advertise for, and welcome Christian immigrants.
The nerve of those hate-filled Muslims! /sarc
Here’s a Brit describing his immigration to, and experience in, Malaysia:
https://youtu.be/gWrQaOzbkJE
This is not to whitewash any country, or any religion. This discussion began with Watt’s posting wild ravings about Islam, that have no connection to reality.
The point here is that there is good and bad with any and all religions, cultures, races, nations. Dealing with reality, getting out and experiencing reality, in all its positives and negatives, is crucial.
Kent – Please tell Asia Bibi, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Brigitte Gabriel, etc, etc. about what a peaceful, loving “religion” Islum is, you poor, deluded fool. Muhammad was a pedophile, a murderer, and a demoniac. His followers today still pursue only sexual gratification, riches, and above all POWER to subjugate decent people and crush them under their heel. May you learn this before you die and meet Our Lord.
Sander,
Thanks for your comments.
“Europe and Islam have a history, with Islam trying to conquer Europe, and Islam pirates abducting people to sell as slaves. Europe fought back, which should not surprise anybody.”
A little selective with your quick review of history, aren’t you? You seem to have glossed over the successive waves of European invasions of the Levant, Turkey, North Africa, Persia, and beyond–beginning with Alexander the Great, and continuing through waves of Crusades, colonization, post-WW2 division of spoils, 1948’s seizure and occupation of Palestine, and today’s invasions and covert and overt meddling in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt, etc, etc. Gosh, how forgetful of you!
European/NATO/neocon deadly meddling continues apace this very moment. The waves of refugees that poured into Europe recently, filling the slums you decry, were not some spontaneous migration–they left their countries because NATO/neocon wars made their countries unlivable! You may have forgotten, or choose to ignore reality, but reality has a way of coming back and biting those who live in a fantasy-world!
However, those historical, and current issues, are not necessarily religious issues–although religion is twisted up with nationality and culture in all of them.
“Currently certain areas with lots of Muslim immigrants are becomimg no-go areas. The Paris banlieus are quite famous, and nobody in his right mind is visiting those places when they are in Paris. In the Netherlands the Moroccan crime syndicats in Amsterdam don’t care at all about human lives anymore, happily shooting each other with no regard for innocent bystanders. Or they cut people’s heads of and leave these as a sign on the street.”
Europe’s “original sin,” for which you’re paying now, is your colonial past. Those barbarians are your colonials, whom you welcomed in as citizens after the collapse of your colonial power. Your inability to recognize, protect, and defend your native culture is not the fault of the barbarians in your midst. And it is not the fault of the religion of some of them. And their religion didn’t make them barbarians–their culture did.
“People are against Islam because of Muslim actions. It is as simple as that.”
Okay. But that was not the original discussion. Watt made wildly false assertions about the nature of Islam. Would it be logical to blame all Christians for the actions of a few? Or to blame Christianity because cults and sects practice the religion in harmful ways, or claim to practice but actually pervert Christianity? That’s Watt’s mistake.
Do you believe that Islam requires “Moroccan crime syndicats in Amsterdam …happily shooting each other with no regard for innocent bystanders.”?
If so, do you believe that Catholicism requires Sicilian crime syndicates to sell heroin, run prostitutes and slaughter their rivals in New Jersey?
And furthermore, should we be against Catholicism because of Catholic actions? See: Sicilian crime families, Irish Catholic terrorism, clerical rapes and abuses, etc., etc, etc.
Let he who is without sin…
Glass houses….
etc.
Pearl,
I responded to Watt’s specific assertions about specific issues, with facts.
I’d be happy to discuss any of those facts, and any of Watt’s other assertions.
Your ad hominem name-calling provides no facts to discuss.
Your list of neocon-sponsored propaganda puppets is quite short.
Imagine a highly-financed foreign power wanted to impugn Christianity. Imagine this foreign power had unlimited funding. Imagine this foreign power scoured the globe for ex-Christians who would tell horror stories about their Christian experiences–say at the hands of pedophile priests, or as survivors of Rev. Jim Jones’ suicide cult, or ex-members of Rev. Moon’s strange mass wedding cult, or survivors of snake-handling rites in Appalachia, or survivors of the machete wielding priests in the Rwanda genocide, or Mormon sister wives, or …
Imagine.
Would their stories, true though they may be, change what Christianity is? Would the vile perversions of the religion prove anything about the religion?
Open your eyes, your heart, and your mind to reality. A few disaffected, foreign sponsored whistle-blowers, true though their stories may be, are not reflective of the whole religion.
You might want to try getting out and seeing the world, too. Get out and see what’s really happening, what people are actually like. Visit the cultures and experience them. Don’t let your heart and soul be corrupted by foreign haters, filling you up with fear, hate and bile.
Think positive!
What seems to be getting insufficient discussion is whether, and how, any of that (jihad, violence, compulsion, marriage of church and state) can be changed. Some religions have built-in mechanisms for adapting to a changing world, most (IMO) do not; Islam in particular is locked by the declaration that there is no prophet after Mohammad, thus no one with authority to change anything defined by Mohammad.
Christianity, depending on the flavor, has a similar problem. What Jesus declared only Jesus can undeclare. Fortunately most of Christianity is defined by the apostles and thus other apostles can change those things; also, Jesus did not specify to force the whole world into Christianity.
Kent,
I never talk to anyone who uses the word “hateful” in an argument.
Faith,
Bully for you!
Standards live!
Think positive!
Kent
Kent, you are a smart guy and Muslim apologist. I don’t understand how anyone can follow a BS religion like Islam. It’s founder, Muhammad, should be burning in hell for that garbage he foisted onto humanity. Prophet? Give me a break. He was an opportunist who killed, raped, and massacred thousands of innocent people. I am shocked that anyone with half a brain would defend that fool.
George,
Thanks for your comment. I’m a realist who lives in the real world and tries to help others to realize the danger of accepting the lies and influence operations that fill your mind with hate for people and things you don’t understand. Don’t let them do that to you. Get out and see for yourself. Don’t rely on the filter of foreigners with ulterior motives telling you to hate their enemies.
This conversation began with a few attempts at injecting some tidbits of reality in response to Watt’s ignorant, mis-informed, hate-filled assertions.
I’ve provided facts and information, in response to Watt’s and other’s comments. I’m happy to continue that as long as folks continue sharing their own mis-conceptions.
“Prophet? Give me a break. He was an opportunist who killed, raped, and massacred thousands of innocent people.”
Really? He did that all himself?
In case you’re not familiar with history, no he didn’t. He led a group of people who were persecuted and chased around the desert. They stood up for themselves, and fought back, in a series of wars. People died.
Now, consider the times–Mohamed lived in the 700’s anno domini. What had Christians, and Jews, and Hindus, and Buddhists, and Confucians, and pagans done in the name(s) of God in the 1000 years before that time?
Well, if you’re familiar with history, you’d know that all of those groups, many in the name of their God, “killed, raped, and massacred thousands of innocent people.”
In context,the actions of its adherents during the early days of Islam, and since, are no worse than every other major (and minor) religion.
Ignoring reality and following foreign influence operators, just leads you to bitterness and bile. Get out in the real world. See for yourself.
Think positive!
@ Kent Clizbe
Your ridiculous diatribe falls on deaf ears, at least as far as mine are concerned. Why? Because the historical record does not lie about the nature of Islam or its adherents.
Apologists for Islam such as yourself invariably rely upon the tactics of denial and misdirection to explain away the 1,400 year record of bloodshed, violence, chaos and depravity which have followed Islam wherever it is practiced.
Most westerners are unaware that the Koran is not written/presented chronologically, but based upon length of verse and other factors. Roughly speaking, the book is divided into two sections, the Koran of Mecca and the Koran of Medina (Yathrib as it was then called), each of which corresponds to a period in Mohammed’s life.
During the first half of his life as a Muslim, Mohammed was largely unknown in most of Arabia and had few followers. During this time, he preached coexistence with non-Muslims and conciliation with other ways of life and belief. However, during this time, he and his followers migrated to what is now modern-day Medina, gathering followers along the way. Mohammed’s message became that of a conqueror and warlord, a vision increasingly intolerant of and hostile toward non-Muslims and other ways of life and spiritual belief.
Mohammed’s popularity soared with the increased aggressiveness of his vision, and he and his followers were able to conquer Yathrib (Medina), allowing them to consolidate control over Arabia as a whole, and then begin expanding outward in all directions. This was the time of Mohammed the warlord, the despoiler of children, the enslaver of women, the mass executioner of infidels and other unbelievers, the conqueror, the ruthless despot ruling over those whom he subjugated.
Islam can be understood only by reference to its three foundational works, namely the Koran, the Hadiths (the traditions of Mohammed), and the sira (the life of Mohammed). Sharia (Islamic religious) law, which governs every aspect of the believer’s existence, is derived from these three sources.
Your claim that jihad is not central to Islam is risible and false. The prophet himself said that it ranks second only to the act of being a Muslim itself, in importance to the believer, the true shahid of Islam. This importance is seen in the prestige which accords to Muslims who perish while waging jihad; they are promised a place in paradise with all of the earthy pleasures they desire, if a given mujahid meets such an end.
Islam condones, even celebrates slavery, that is the enslavement of infidels. Mohammed once asked his believers prior to a raid, “Do you want the Banu al-Asfar?” meaning, did his warriors want the women of Byzantium, renowned for their fair skin and hair? They were about to embark upon a slave-taking raid, something which is still practiced by the soldiers of Allah (Boko Haram, et al.) today in places like Nigeria and the Sudan.
Muslims are history’s most-prolific mass murderers, with the blood of some 280 million souls upon their hands over their near millennium and a half of blood-letting. They also are responsible for the single biggest act of genocide in human history, namely the Mughal empire of the Indian subcontinent which slew some fifty million Hindus, Buddhists and other non-Muslims during the mid-1500s.
Muslims are also the most-prolific slavers in history, and have enslaved uncounted tens of millions of Africans, Europeans, Asians and others over the centuries. In Arabic slang, the word for a black man is the same as the one for slave. Though it is unknown to most modern-day non-Muslims, slavery is still widely practiced in the Muslim world, and only within the last two decades have the last holdouts banned the practice and made it illegal, i.e., Mauritania, etc. The Arab nations did not ban it until 1960 and after. Despite the window-dressing of the bans and laws, slavery is extremely common in the Islamic world today; it is simply practiced more-discreetly and away from the public eye.
Nor are acts of genocide and mass murder part of only Islam’s past. Most historians rank the Armenian genocide of 1915-1921 as the first “modern” genocide, i.e., the first to be recorded photographically and covered by modern news media. The Sunni Muslim Ottoman Turks slew an estimated 1.5 million Armenian and Greek Christians. Even by Islamic standards, the butchery was exceptionally horrible; teenaged Christian girls were stripped naked and nailed to large wooden crosses in the deserts of Asia Minor and left to die in the hot sun. Photos survive of these and other outrages.
As recently as the Darfur crisis, Sudanese Muslims were hunting down and killing Christians and other infidels wherever they could find them. Former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, a practicing Muslim, used Sudanese army helicopter gunships to rocket and strafe helpless Christian villages and destroy churches. The carnage got so bad that non-Muslim Sudanese had to form their own nation, the South Sudan, in order to attain a degree of safety, but even today, fierce Islamic Janjaweed tribesmen continue to raid non-Muslim settlements across the border.
Muslim persecution of non-Muslims continues apace in Nigeria as well, even as we speak. The only way Christians and others get any measure of safety is by arming themselves, just as their forbearers had to do centuries ago.
While it is unarguably true that there are “peaceful Muslims” guilty of no direct involvement in these despicable acts, you’ll forgive us infidels for not trusting them, since they still continue to worship the same violent creed as their more-aggressive brethren. Maybe they follow only the Meccan passages of the Koran, but by failing to renounce (let alone stop) their violent coreligionists from slaughtering others, they must share the guilt as well.
There are hopeful signs in some of the Arabic nations of reform, but we have heard such promises before and seen them broken. It is widely known that Mohammed himself liked to use false treaties of peace when it suited Muslim needs, only to renounce them when it suited him. Such deception – when used against a fellow believer, is held to be sinful – but it is permitted, even praised, when done with an infidel.
And of course we see the blood-stained pathway carved across Europe by your coreligionists. Executing a French priest on the alter of his own cathedral, mass rape, grooming scandals, where does it end? Where the soldiers of Allah go, these things follow.
No doubt that the Ottoman’s and Mughals did oppression. This cannot be laid at the doorstep of Islam although I get why non-Muslims would do that. But the exaggerations are just crazy…it reminds me of the exaggerations of the oppression by the N.S Germans. I mean come on. It seems this narrative is following in the footsteps of the unholy Judeo-Christian alliance. Western Christians if they want to remain Christian ought to look into Orthodox Christianity.