DescentBB

This topic should interest ThunderBunny at least. I like to read Clive Cussler's books, specifically the new one in paperback, 'Corsair', and a bit of history I'd long forgotten about caught my eye that was written in the front of the book. Cussler had a segment from Jefferson's Congressional Congress testimony about the Barbary Pirates. It seems the U.S. has been fighting the Islamic Religion for a very long time, even from our birth as a nation.

During Congressional Congress testimony, Secretary of State John Jay submitted the account of what Thomas Jefferson and John Adams told him about their query to the Tripoli Envoy. The "Dey of Algiers" Ambassador to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, replied in answer to their question of why Muslims held so much hostility towards America even though America had harbored no such hostility towards them. The Tripoli Envoy answered about Islam (from Cussler's book).....

..."that it is founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise."

This is fascinating history and much of it parallels or repeats what the U.S. is now enduring today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

http://wordforit.wordpress.com/2007/09/ ... ons-hands/

I liked John Adams' prophetic comment on the Barbary Pirates too:

John Adams wrote:"We ought not fight them at all unless we determine to fight them forever."

I have a newly found impression about Islam and any small delusional respect I once held for it is now totally gone. It seems that we will never have peace until one of us is totally destroyed, given past history.

Dont worry TC we have a new president, one that will improve our Image in the Muslim world. everything will be OK.

That's my point. It looks like from reading history that appeasing Muslims will be a waste of time and counterproductive for the U.S. and Western Civilization in the long run. We will always face that inevitable conclusion, they'll always want to conquer or kill all infidels if they follow the Koran and their Prophet to the letter.

TC-

The only real way to \"fight\" islam is to not accept it. Wherever it seeks to impose its rules (with respect to their \"interpretation\" of women's rights- rather lack thereof, sharia law, etc) we must oppose it.

We must also support islamic reform movements - they do exist but are almost unheard of because the \"religion of peace\" has stifled their voices.

Creating a reformed version of islam that renounces violence and accepts equality with all other peoples (infidel or not) is probably the best way forward.

TB wrote:Creating a reformed version of islam that renounces violence and accepts equality with all other peoples (infidel or not) is probably the best way forward.

That is folly, in my mind. Support muslim people who are peaceful? Great. Support/accept some peaceful revision of Islam... folly.

I don't know about everyone else, but I'm pretty proud of TC for coming to that conclusion.

tunnelcat wrote:That's my point. It looks like from reading history that appeasing Muslims will be a waste of time and counterproductive for the U.S. and Western Civilization in the long run. We will always face that inevitable conclusion, they'll always want to conquer or kill all infidels if they follow the Koran and their Prophet to the letter.

yeah i guess that's why every Muslim country in the world has declared war on America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mu ... _countries

oh wait, that's not actually the case.
how odd


ps: Slavery is recommended in the Christian Bible.

Just because they don't declare war against America doesn't mean they're not at enmity with us. Most of those countries are too busy fighting themselves, I think. I do know that the violent persecution of Christians by Muslims is much more prevalent that any declarations against our country as a whole. You don't hear about that as much on the news, but I've heard through various channels of Christian ministry that it is very bad in some places.

Roid wrote:Slavery is recommended in the Christian Bible.

An answer to this would take too long, and you're not worth it. But since you bothered to post that, why don't you post the verse(s). Suffice to say, for now, that people do not understand slavery very well, and so, having strong feelings toward the slavery we see in our recent history, they gladly accept it in other forms, and at the same time deny the truth that some men by their own actions aspire to nothing better than slavery. All men are created equal, but life does not owe you an equal footing (though it is unjust for another man to try to hold you down).

roid wrote:...
ps: Slavery is recommended in the Christian Bible.

I don't know the context of the 'recommendation' you site but taking you at your word the BIG, HUGE, EXTREMELY IMPORTANT difference isn't in the ancient religious text's it's in the way the leaders of the religion currently interpret the writings and guide their followers!

The Christian religion doesn't teach our children to engage in slavery...or beheading, murder, martyrdom, terrorism, etc. They don't teach that all non-Christians are sub-human and not deserving of life.
Where Christian leadership often exports food, medicine, education and, yes, those horrible weapons of mass destruction called bibles, the Islamic leaders are organizing the export of DEATH to infidels in the form of car bombs, people bombs, roadside bombs, missiles, rockets, and soon to play out in a non-believers country near you! nuclear weaponary!! Oh Joy!

There is the REALLY BIG distinction between the two entities you so strongly desire to equate. But yea, other than the centuries of social evolution and the fact that Christian religious leaders don't make the laws in our government, issue fatwa's calling for the death of non-believers etc. ...yea, other than those minor differences they are quite comparable.

[insert facpalm gif the size of Texas here]

I have a newly found impression about Islam and any small delusional respect I once held for it is now totally gone.

I'm more curious as to why many people seem to \"respect\" islam more than western religion.

Is it because islam is seen as a mysterious eastern religion that has NOT been spewed by a slimy sweaty televangelist pig on TV?

The devil we know is worse than the devil we don't know? - no pun intended.

Do people like Roid excuse the mysogynistic, violent and anti-free will nature of islam because it's not \"that judgemental EVIL hypocracy known as judeo-christian philosophy?\"

Perhaps it's a projection of some kind of misplaced self-loathing?

This has been a mystery to me.

Holy Slavery

Leviticus 25:44-46 (New Living Translation)

44 “However, you may purchase male and female slaves from among the nations around you. 45 You may also purchase the children of temporary residents who live among you, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, 46 passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat them as slaves, but you must never treat your fellow Israelites this way.

Exodus 21:2-6 (New Living Translation)

2 “If you buy a Hebrew slave, he may serve for no more than six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. 3 If he was single when he became your slave, he shall leave single. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife must be freed with him.

4 “If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave and they had sons or daughters, then only the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. 5 But the slave may declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I don’t want to go free.’ 6 If he does this, his master must present him before God.[a] Then his master must take him to the door or doorpost and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will serve his master for life.

Exodus 21:7-11 (New Living Translation)

7 “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. 8 If she does not satisfy her owner, he must allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. 9 But if the slave’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave but as a daughter.

10 “If a man who has married a slave wife takes another wife for himself, he must not neglect the rights of the first wife to food, clothing, and sexual intimacy. 11 If he fails in any of these three obligations, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.

Exodus 21:20-21 (New Living Translation)

20 “If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. 21 But if the slave recovers within a day or two, then the owner shall not be punished, since the slave is his property.

Ephesians 6:5 (New Living Translation)

Slaves and Masters

5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.

1 Timothy 6:1-2 (New Living Translation)

1 Timothy 6

1 All slaves should show full respect for their masters so they will not bring shame on the name of God and his teaching. 2 If the masters are believers, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. Those slaves should work all the harder because their efforts are helping other believers[a] who are well loved.

Luke 12:47-48 (New Living Translation)

47 “And a servant who knows what the master wants, but isn’t prepared and doesn’t carry out those instructions, will be severely punished. 48 But someone who does not know, and then does something wrong, will be punished only lightly. When someone has been given much, much will be required in return; and when someone has been entrusted with much, even more will be required.

tunnelcat wrote:That's my point. It looks like from reading history that appeasing Muslims will be a waste of time and counterproductive for the U.S. and Western Civilization in the long run. We will always face that inevitable conclusion, they'll always want to conquer or kill all infidels if they follow the Koran and their Prophet to the letter.

TC this goes MUCH farther back than just the beginning of our country. has anyone heard of the crusades??? history has been distorted into making you believe that the Crusades were about spreading Christianity to the middle east. while there is a vague truth to that, it was really about the Muslim invasion of Jerusalem,

Wiki wrote:The Crusades were a series of religiously sanctioned military campaigns waged by much of Latin Christian Europe, particularly the Franks of France and the Holy Roman Empire. The specific crusades to restore Christian control of the Holy Land were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291. Other campaigns in Spain and Eastern Europe continued into the 15th century. The Crusades were fought mainly against Muslims,

Wiki wrote:The Crusades originally had the goal of recapturing Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule and were launched in response to a call from the Christian Byzantine Empire for help against the expansion of the Muslim Seljuk Turks into Anatolia.

so it appears that this so called Religion of peace activity has been going on for well over 1000 years. and if you read history inc. the Battle of Thermopylae and the Bible its been going on for MUCH longer than that.

One of those is actually misrepresented in the version you're quoting from. Here it is in the NKJV:

Exodust 21 wrote:20 And if a man beats his male or female servant with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished. 21 "Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property.

What it's actually saying there, I believe, is that the man is only subject to punishment if the slave dies while he is beating him, but if he lives for a day or two and dies he shall not be punished (you see why I stick with the KJV or the NKJV).

There's another one here:

Exodus 21 wrote:26 "If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. 27 "And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.

Anyway, I maintain that it is a falsehood and indefensible even to accuse the Christian "Old Testament" (important descriptor, there) of "recommending" slavery. It does allow for it, but where in all of that does it recommend slavery?! Now to say that the Christian Bible "recommends slavery" is an out-and-out poisonous misrepresentation. That's just a lie. You know very well what "recommends" means, and that when you charge the "Christian Bible" with it that means Christians could "legally" use this supposed recommendation to justify the taking of slaves.

1. TB, Islam “is” a western religion, not an “eastern” religion such as Hinduism, it has only been adapted by people in the east.

2. When the hell are people going to figure out who the real enemys are?

3. The Bible “was” used as an excuse for slavery for hundreds of years.

But can we forget the past for once and focus on the present, most people want to live in peace, and that includes muslims.

Is that another my bible is better than your bible reference?

As you should also note that the old testament was the way of the Israelites the chosen people. That Leviticus contains laws and priestly rituals of the Israelites. The words laid out in the new testament applies to all the people in the world since the Crucifixion of Christ fulfilled the law of the old testament open the door for us gentles to enter heaven.

So if you happen to be enslave remember as a Christian you are to obey your master.

The Bible says . . .

Slaves should obey their masters

\"Slaves, be obedient to those who are your earthly masters, with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as to Christ.\" (Ephesians 6:5)
\"Slaves, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters.\" (Collossians 3:22)
\"Bid slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect.\" (Titus 2:9)
\"Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed.\" (1 Timothy 6:1)

For once? People are always forgetting key points about the past.

Spidey wrote:3. The Bible “was” used as an excuse for slavery for hundreds of years.

I realize that. The important point I make is that they don't have a leg to stand on, biblically-speaking, in justifying their lifestyles and actions (which from many accounts I've heard were evil). The Bible, in the Old Testament, was speaking to the Hebrews who were under their law and their covenant with God. This covenant does not extend to Americans, only the new covenant can. These people were obviously hypocrites and liars, because while they tried to use the Bible in defense of the practice it is certain that they did not abide even by the non-applicable portions of scripture that were their shields in their dealings with their slaves. So what? People will lie, and there are a lot of lies and liars out there. Believe it or not there were people in history that took them to task on it--people that would be in agreement with me! And now you and anyone else in your ignorance and impertinence gets to take the errors of the ones they were fighting, and use them as a tool against me... congratulations.

And this "most people want to live in peace" stuff is subjective and naive, IMO. Sure people who are the victims or the ones watching at the sidelines of violence want peace, and some people even care enough about their loved ones and their fellow man to want peace, but a lot of people want what they want, and will do what they can to get it, thinking only of themselves, and that is where strife and violence come from, and when someone is not only selfish but motivated and inventive--having not only the desire but the means, that's where you have a real problem.

Insurrectionist wrote:Is that another my bible is better than your bible reference?

Nope. But it's your right as a defensive, ignorant American to call it that. That's another KJV/NKJV is a more faithful representation reference. The fact that I use the more faithful version does not afford me any enjoyment or pride (I wouldn't know a thing about it except for my dad and a gentleman by the name of Les Garrett). I don't give a damn about who's right and who's wrong. It's just that you're not going to get an accurate representation of the original writing in many of the Bible versions that are prevalent today, and that is what it is. If you're really trying to understand what it is that God is trying to convey, that should be pretty important to you. If your bible is simply your favorite flavor, that speaks to your maturity.

Insurrectionist wrote:So if you happen to be enslave remember as a Christian you are to obey your master.

That is correct. The Bible also tells us not to become slaves of men, having been made free by God. I would say that God is not as concerned with the situation of slavery as he is with the souls and the eternal situation of those involved. Throughout the Bible many men of God have lived in a godly manner in less than ideal situations (Daniel, Joseph, ...).

That wasn’t a personal attack…

And if you think I can’t be objective about “most” people wanting peace, then please show me the evidence to the contrary, instead of pretending you have some understanding of the world around us that I don’t.

Does a person want peace when they're willing to steal from someone else? Even if the theft is easy to justify?

Does a person want peace when they ride your bumper on the highway while you're already doing 3MPH over the limit?

Does a person want peace when they covet your girlfriend or your wife (same applies to boyfriend/husband)?

Does a person want peace when they damage your property and leave you to handle the bill?

Does a person want peace when they want your tax money to pay their way in life?

Does a person want peace when they're willing to lie in order to benefit or protect themselves?

It may be that more people actually are willing to have peace than I think, but I believe the desire for peace is often a convenience (or a popularity) rather than an unselfish desire, and the difference is that one of those will naturally give way when opportunity knocks and the other will not.

1. TB, Islam “is” a western religion, not an “eastern” religion such as Hinduism, it has only been adapted by people in the east.

------
Is it because islam is seen as a mysterious eastern religion that has NOT been spewed by a slimy sweaty televangelist pig on TV?
------

I'm talking about perception (or rather misconception) Spidey.

But can we forget the past for once and focus on the present, most people want to live in peace, and that includes muslims.

True- but \"devout\" muslims want peace without the presence of the infidel on earth.

As long as there are people who are not muslim and do not accept muslim rule, there will always be a Dar Al Harb- a house of war.

Thorne, I was speaking of peace relative to conflict (war) I have no idea what people are thinking when they engage in those behaviors. Perhaps they are not aware of the potential for conflict when they do these things, but I doubt it’s their motivation.

TB, most of the Islam that spread out of the middle east is of the peaceful variety, If you look into it, you will find that it is the radical Arabs that are starting most of the trouble around the world, because they believe that only their form of Islam is the only true Islam.

Most Muslims around the world don’t give a rats ass what translation of the Bible Thorne subscribes to.

And, then to answer your question…I would have to say no, because Islam is no more “mysterious” than any other mono theistic religion. If people see it that way, well that goes to show that Americans need to get up to date, with their world knowledge.

Spidey wrote:Thorne, I was speaking of peace relative to conflict (war) I have no idea what people are thinking when they engage in those behaviors.

What I'm saying, as I'm pretending I have some understanding of the world around us that you don't, is that this is how you can tell who really wants peace and who only says/thinks they do. There may be a difference of scale, of scope, or of collusion but peace on any level boils down to those very simple concepts, and you can use that as a litmus test.

And there is your evidence to the contrary. Look around you.

I find it easy to believe that most people don't want "war", but when they don't really want peace either what is going to happen?

What American's really need to do is just stand up and say \"if we don't get peace there's gonna be war!\" ...er

CUDA wrote:so it appears that this so called Religion of peace activity has been going on for well over 1000 years. and if you read history inc. the Battle of Thermopylae and the Bible its been going on for MUCH longer than that.

I was referring to the historical time period of the U.S. specifically, only the last ~ 200 plus years we've been a nation. I find it striking that we were singled out and constantly attacked by Muslim pirates when we had NO history of aggression towards them. Was it because the America, as a young nation, had NO LARGE NAVY to speak of at that point to defend ourselves and that these Muslim pirates were just opportunists using Islam as a justification for their attacks? We saw from that period that appeasement was pretty worthless in putting a stop to the attacks. We had to militarily stomp them down.

roid wrote:yeah i guess that's why every Muslim country in the world has declared war on America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mu ... _countries

oh wait, that's not actually the case.
how odd

roid, I'm not implying all Muslim nations are out to destroy the U.S. There aren't enough organized numbers that are radical in their belief of Islam, YET. What I was trying to get at was that there have always been those radical Muslims waging war on the U.S. They also do NOT ever want to make peace with Christians or non-Muslims, no matter what. This radical version is not flexible in accommodating or existing with infidels if it gains popularity. And Islam as a religion is growing throughout the world. Immigration is also spreading it quite far to other nations as well. Given the history and animosity by Muslims towards Western Civilizations and Christians specifically, how long before we are in the minority and more radical factions start gaining strength? And which Islam version wins out in the long run? The peaceful version or the radical version? While we court the peaceful Muslims and kill the radical ones, how will we know if we're succeeding with the peaceful faction or just secretly pissing them off for killing their Muslim brethren?

And then we've got Christian Churches from the U.S. trying to 'evangelize' and 'convert' more and more people in Muslim nations. Muslims must see that as a threat to their religion. I see this constant pushing between religions to get as many members as possible becoming future flash point for conflict on a very large scale. So those people that are not of either religion get caught in the middle of a religious war.

Granted there are other reasons for going to war other than religion, but religion can garner the most passion or justification for FIGHTING a war. What an absolute waste of an idea originally meant to help humans understand their nature and existence in the universe.

Well Thorne, if you are going to equate every single bad behavior known to mankind, to a lack of desire for peace…then I have no argument.

That's both a gross generalization and an oversimplification, but I accept your resignation... and I will resist the temptation... to keep using words ending in "ation".

tunnelcat wrote:Granted there are other reasons for going to war other than religion, but religion can garner the most passion or justification for FIGHTING a war.

Religion? How many wars have been fought over religion in the last millennium? Unless I'm very mistaken it's usually for power or land.

Sergeant Thorne wrote: Nope. But it's your right as a defensive, ignorant American to call it that. That's another KJV/NKJV is a more faithful representation reference. The fact that I use the more faithful version does not afford me any enjoyment or pride (I wouldn't know a thing about it except for my dad and a gentleman by the name of Les Garrett). I don't give a damn about who's right and who's wrong. It's just that you're not going to get an accurate representation of the original writing in many of the Bible versions that are prevalent today, and that is what it is. If you're really trying to understand what it is that God is trying to convey, that should be pretty important to you. If your bible is simply your favorite flavor, that speaks to your maturity.

So it was a my bible is better than your bible reference. You do show your maturity with the ignorant American comment.

Nope. Just annoyed.

.

It only takes one side to define what a war is about, this was the point I was trying to make in another thread when I called it a “holy war”.

EDIT…this was a response to a post that was deleted…I guess?

Yeah, sorry. I had pretty much decided what you just said, and it's late and I'm frustrated with the day and not thinking too clearly.

tunnelcat did mention something about friction between two religions leading to a war, and I felt that in the case of Islam VS Christianity that was unfounded.

ThunderBunny wrote:I'm more curious as to why many people seem to "respect" islam more than western religion.

Is it because islam is seen as a mysterious eastern religion that has NOT been spewed by a slimy sweaty televangelist pig on TV?

The devil we know is worse than the devil we don't know? - no pun intended.

Do people like Roid excuse the mysogynistic, violent and anti-free will nature of islam because it's not "that judgemental EVIL hypocracy known as judeo-christian philosophy?"

Perhaps it's a projection of some kind of misplaced self-loathing?

This has been a mystery to me.

I don't respect Islam, i just think it's hypocritical to complain about one stupid religion when there's another stupid religion right in front of you.

I handed an Islamic preacher's ass back to him today - and most of the arguments i used can also be used on Christianity.

The loudest criticism of Islam always seems to come from the Christian right. Competing teams in a sport for retards.

It might interest you know know I'm an atheist, Roid.

Yes i know, you are an anomaly.
But most of the anti-Islam info that you feed on, comes from the Christian right.

So-

If you compared the two, do you think the \"Christian right,\" as you call it, is more evil than the islamists they decry?

Maybe the \"Christian right\" were the ones to see Islam for what it really is. maybe being PC and thinking you can make everyone be your friend is just a foolish thought.

And one of the Islam haters right here on this board is on the far left, not to mention if you can’t think of at least one other group that dislikes Islam…you must live in a cave.

ThunderBunny wrote:So-

If you compared the two, do you think the "Christian right," as you call it, is more evil than the islamists they decry?

i think Islam edges ahead on the evil scale.

People are evil

The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. Whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles.

AYN RAND,
Russian-American novelist, philosopher