Is Islamic faith reasonable.

[A Troubled Man]

Sorry to say this but do you know the Christian history is much worse violent then the Islamic one?

The Crusades are just a simple example to start with

And yet, the Islamic/Muslim conquests lasted hundreds of years longer than the Crusades, covered a lot more territory and cost a lot more lives. Christianity is relatively dormant now in regards to violence while Islamic violence is on the rise.

 

[F0uad]

And yet, the Islamic/Muslim conquests lasted hundreds of years longer than the Crusades, covered a lot more territory and cost a lot more lives. Christianity is relatively dormant now in regards to violence while Islamic violence is on the rise.

So you think the Crusade is the only thing what Christian history had to offer?

Christianity covered more lives in the first place and less territory so i would assume that Christanity is more violent.

 

[A Troubled Man]

So you think the Crusade is the only thing what Christian history had to offer?

I never said it did. I merely pointed out your errors in facts.

Christianity covered more lives in the first place and less territory so i would assume that Christanity is more violent.

Assumption noted and corrected.

 

[1robin]

Sorry to say this but do you know the Christian history is much worse violent then the Islamic one?

The Crusades are just a simple example to start with, your argument that ''Christian states'' in modern time do nothing is simply because there is no Christian state but secularist states and i would even argue that there are no REAL Islamic states in these times..

We can conclude that Christians did not survive Secularism and the Islamic Ones did but not fully practice its teachings.

Well hello F0uad, My statement was taylored for that weird question someone posed. It was not meant to address the point you are making. As I am not a professional historian and the history of Islam is shorter than Christianity I will not at this time attempt to refute your claim. I was commenting on somewhat recent times that I am familiar with and my statements hold. You have to admit that while the U.S may or may not have done more violence to Islam than it has committed itself. If you compare Christian violence to muslim violence in the last 100 to 200 years there is no denying that Islam has produce the vast majority of violence. If you want to discuss the violence totals throught history then I will research it further.

 

[arthra]

A professional historian wrote:

"If you compare Christian violence to muslim violence in the last 100 to 200 years there is no denying that Islam has produce the vast majority of violence. If you want to discuss the violence totals throught history then I will research it further."

What would you call WWI? Christians on both sides fought in Europe... and elsewhere...so did some Muslims but the major carnage was in Europe itself...

World War I casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[F0uad]

Well hello F0uad, My statement was taylored for that weird question someone posed. It was not meant to address the point you are making. As I am not a professional historian and the history of Islam is shorter than Christianity I will not at this time attempt to refute your claim. I was commenting on somewhat recent times that I am familiar with and my statements hold. You have to admit that while the U.S may or may not have done more violence to Islam than it has committed itself. If you compare Christian violence to muslim violence in the last 100 to 200 years there is no denying that Islam has produce the vast majority of violence. If you want to discuss the violence totals throught history then I will research it further.

I was actually not trying to make a point.

I highlighted the thing i find ridiculous, what about if we took 300years then we can clearly see that Christians of Europe killed over 200millon Natives and reduced the population to 2%. That great country what was based on Christianity and Christian values did more harm then China, Russia And Germany combined in its years of existence.

There were almost no Christian states 100years ago most of them were turning to Secularist states, and please do your research about Christian History and then compare it with the Islamic one.

Islam lived about 600/700years in peace while we can see the Christian history having the maximum of 100. I am not going to quote wars any-more because i find those offensive towards ''Christians'' and ''Atheist'' if you do want to have a dialogue or debate about i will ask you to first look into the History of America,Europe,Africa,Middle-east and Asia.


Ps: do not forget there were over 9 crusades don't think there was simply one.

 

[1robin]

I was actually not trying to make a point.

I highlighted the thing i find ridiculous, what about if we took 300years then we can clearly see that Christians of Europe killed over 200millon Natives and reduced the population to 2%. That great country what was based on Christianity and Christian values did more harm then China, Russia And Germany combined in its years of existence.

First of all I didn't make any claims about 300 years ago. Second Natives of what? Are you attempting to refer to the catholic conquorers in South America? Or the american Indians? Third What great country? What Christian group are you talking about. Europe is not a Christian organisation, it's a bunch of countries. Please be more specific if your interested in a real discussion.

There were almost no Christian states 100years ago most of them were turning to Secularist states, and please do your research about Christian History and then compare it with the Islamic one.

What in the world is this in response to. I never mentioned countries. I mentioned Christians. Did the Baptists kill 200million people I don't know about.

Islam lived about 600/700years in peace while we can see the Christian history having the maximum of 100. I am not going to quote wars any-more because i find those offensive towards ''Christians'' and ''Atheist'' if you do want to have a dialogue or debate about i will ask you to first look into the History of America,Europe,Africa,Middle-east and Asia.

I am very familiar with many wars. It was kind of a stupid obsession of mine for years. My grand father was in ww1 and I was in the Navy from the cold war through Gulf War 1. I have always researched military history. This isn't about countries or formal military history. I have no problem if you do not want to discuss these things, it might even be admirable but then why did you?


You realise that some of those crusades never even made it there don't you, and most of the rest did little damage. They also took place long before 200 years ago that I stated. However I have already condemned them, I guess it didn't take.

 

[A Troubled Man]

Islam lived about 600/700years in peace...

So, you've actually never heard of the Muslim Conquests? They began in 622 and went on until their decline sometime after 1800.

 

[1robin]

A professional historian wrote:

"If you compare Christian violence to muslim violence in the last 100 to 200 years there is no denying that Islam has produce the vast majority of violence. If you want to discuss the violence totals throught history then I will research it further."

What would you call WWI? Christians on both sides fought in Europe... and elsewhere...so did some Muslims but the major carnage was in Europe itself...

World War I casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The causes of World War I, which began in central Europe in late June 1914, included intertwined factors, such as the conflicts and hostility of the four decades leading up to the war. Militarism, alliances, imperialism, and nationalism played major roles in the conflict as well. However, the immediate origins of the war lay in the decisions taken by statesmen and generals during the Crisis of 1914, casus belli for which was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and his wife by Gavrilo Princip, an irredentist Serb.[1]
The crisis came after a long and difficult series of diplomatic clashes between the Great Powers (Italy, France, Germany, the British Empire, Austria-Hungarian Empire and Russia) over European and colonial issues in the decade before 1914 that had left tensions high. In turn these diplomatic clashes can be traced to changes in the balance of power in Europe since 1867.[2] The more immediate cause for the war was tensions over territory in the Balkans. Austria-Hungary competed with Serbia and Russia for territory and influence in the region and they pulled the rest of the Great Powers into the conflict through their various alliances and treaties. Causes of World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I did not see the word Christian or theology any where in there.

I did not claim Islam killed 50million people because they were in the wauffen SS that killed the jews.

By your rational, I could blame WW2 on dogs because the US and others used them to hunt out bombs and soldiers hiding out.

My claim concerns violence by a mojority religous group for religous reasons. Even that should be clarified even more but I don't have time right now.

 

[F0uad]

First of all I didn't make any claims about 300 years ago. Second Natives of what? Are you attempting to refer to the catholic conquorers in South America? Or the american Indians? Third What great country? What Christian group are you talking about. Europe is not a Christian organisation, it's a bunch of countries. Please be more specific if your interested in a real discussion.

Yes you made claims about 100/200years i simply was pointing out why not give it a 100extra so it will become 300years 1700+ where Christian European countries invaded America and killed over 150 to 200 million natives.

You were talking about Islamic/Muslim wars so i am doing the same why should i address one country while you weren't doing the same, Europe was definitely a Christian ''Organisation'' back in history.

What in the world is this in response to. I never mentioned countries. I mentioned Christians. Did the Baptists kill 200million people I don't know about.

You were talking about Muslim wars compared with Christians wars now if you want to talk about certain times of the Prophets then what about Moses(p) or others?

I am very familiar with many wars. It was kind of a stupid obsession of mine for years. My grand father was in ww1 and I was in the Navy from the cold war through Gulf War 1. I have always researched military history. This isn't about countries or formal military history. I have no problem if you do not want to discuss these things, it might even be admirable but then why did you?

I didn't say i didn't want to discuss them otherwise i would never replied on your first post in this thread, i was simply pointing out that quoting wars is a stupid thing to do towards other people we have to be smart enough to know and accept which ''Side'' or ''Religion'' has the most wars on its shoulders.

I did 3years of study in Islamic history so i think i know what i am talking about, i also served some time in three different countries. I don't think having interest in ''history'' is a bad thing at all.

 

[F0uad]

So, you've actually never heard of the Muslim Conquests? They began in 622 and went on until their decline sometime after 1800.

do you know how to count and how did you just make up that lie?

The Conquest ended almost when it was started i never said it was entirely peacefully but you have to understand that a conquest means conquering countries with force this was certainly not the case for most of the countries and most of them are even justifiable by a third party (jews). I think you have to ask a Jew the question under which rule were Jewish people better of Muslims or Christians.

Once the Caliphate was established there was no conquering going on only defensive wars and maybe some little incidents but no total wars. If you did some research on the Caliphate and Islamic Golden Age you would know that the Majority lived in peace, Jews and Christians were way better of in Muslim ground then Christian ground (Europe) in those times.

 

[1robin]

Yes you made claims about 100/200years i simply was pointing out why not give it a 100extra so it will become 300years 1700+ where Christian European countries invaded America and killed over 150 to 200 million natives.

I just picked that because that is when history really became a science. Before then it existed but it is sometimes a little sketchy, so I thought we could just look at the most reliable data.

You were talking about Islamic/Muslim wars so i am doing the same why should i address one country while you weren't doing the same, Europe was definitely a Christian ''Organisation'' back in history.

If you stated the catholic church or a certain protestant group killed a bunch of people then that is legitamite if true. If you say Germany killed a bunch then that isn't. If I said Iran killed a bunch you would no doubt argue that that isn't necessarily a claim against Islam and you would be right.

You were talking about Muslim wars compared with Christians wars now if you want to talk about certain times of the Prophets then what about Moses(p) or others?

F0uad up until this time you have been very clear but things are slipping. I said the last 200 years to avoid this issue not because I am worried about it. The people in the old testament were not Christians but I claim them anyway and yes they killed a bunch of people. I even said we could discuss those prophetic times people if you want but I will have to do some research to brush up first. I wanted to stay in a more documented and certain time frame to establish common ground and then move backward.

I didn't say i didn't want to discuss them otherwise i would never replied on your first post in this thread, i was simply pointing out that quoting wars is a stupid thing to do towards other people we have to be smart enough which ''Side'' or ''Religion'' has the most wars on its shoulders.

I have already concented to this to some degree as you well know. I was just trying to correct some point someone else made then you said something, so I tried to establish some common ground where atleast we can both agree on the obvious things like old testament violence or modern Islamic violence apparently I hoped for too much.

I did 3years of study in Islamic history so i think i know what i am talking about, i also served some time in three different countries. I don't think having interest in ''history'' is a bad thing at all.

I studied Electrical engineering for 8 and I don't know squat about it. Just kidding. I am not doubting you do know Islamic history. That's why I agreed to debate you 1 on 1. However your lack of scholarly discipline to not start by acknowledging the obvious truth of my claim as common ground before diving off into other less well know things is frustrating.

 

[A Troubled Man]

do you know how to count and how did you just make up that lie?

Yes, I can count and I did not make up a lie.

The Conquest ended almost when it was started i never said it was entirely peacefully but you have to understand that a conquest means conquering countries with force this was certainly not the case for most of the countries and most of them are even justifiable by a third party (jews). I think you have to ask a Jew the question under which rule were Jewish people better of Muslims or Christians.

Strawman. They were called the Muslim Conquests because Muslims, starting with Muhammad in 622 did in fact conquer other countries demanding they accept Islam. This information is readily available.

Once the Caliphate was established there was no conquering going on only defensive wars and maybe some little incidents but no total wars.

Then, they would have been called the Muslim Defensive Wars as opposed to the Muslim Conquests.

If you did some research on the Caliphate and Islamic Golden Age you would know that the Majority lived in peace, Jews and Christians were way better of in Muslim ground then Christian ground (Europe) in those times.

The Islamic Golden Age was little more than what the Muslims Conquests obtained through conquering other countries and then calling it their own.

 

[F0uad]

Strawman. They were called the Muslim Conquests because Muslims, starting with Muhammad in 622 did in fact conquer other countries demanding they accept Islam. This information is readily available.

You have to clarify because your mixing the ''Conquest'' with expansions, Mohammed(saws) didn't took over countries he only controlled Arabia.

Then, they would have been called the Muslim Defensive Wars as opposed to the Muslim Conquests.

No logic re-read my previous message, if a country/state is taken over with the accept-ion of the majority do you think its still a ''Conquest''?

The Islamic Golden Age was little more than what the Muslims Conquests obtained through conquering other countries and then calling it their own.

What are you saying did you ever took time to do some research into Islamic golden age? It had nothing to do with ''conquest'' or taking over land. It was actually spreading wealth and purity to the whole religion. Its called ''Golden Age'' what refers to a wealth time where in the opposite the Christians lived in dark-ages and Churches denounced different thinking people and mostly killed them, science was prohibited and many Jews were presuceted just look at the Spanish Catholics or the Bytainze empire where the ''Muslim Expansions'' actually freed them and were celebrated by taking over.

 

[F0uad]

I studied Electrical engineering for 8 and I don't know squat about it. Just kidding. I am not doubting you do know Islamic history. That's why I agreed to debate you 1 on 1. However your lack of scholarly discipline to not start by acknowledging the obvious truth of my claim as common ground before diving off into other less well know things is frustrating.

I have shorten your text sorry for it but i found it irrelevant to reply on the other things you said.

Some things you consider being truth doesn't add up or make any sense even in modern or historical times Secularism is more violent then both together and we both know there are no real Islamic or Christian states so why are we talking about things that do not exist?

 

[arthra]

1robin wrote:

I did not see the word Christian or theology any where in there.

I did not claim Islam killed 50million people because they were in the wauffen SS that killed the jews.

By your rational, I could blame WW2 on dogs because the US and others used them to hunt out bombs and soldiers hiding out.

My claim concerns violence by a mojority religous group for religous reasons. Even that should be clarified even more but I don't have time right now.

My reply:

The reason I quoted the wiki article was because of the casualities among Christian countries ...many with the state religion being Christian. . I think some of the pessimism about religion in europe was largely caused by the tremendous casualties and disillusionment caused by the war.

Ultimately more than 70 million military personnel, including 60 million Europeans, were mobilised in one of the largest wars in history.[7][8] More than 9 million combatants were killed, largely because of great technological advances in firepower without corresponding advances in mobility. It was the sixth-deadliest conflict in world history, subsequently paving the way for various political changes such as revolutions in the nations involved.[9]

World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the horrors of battle confronted in the ultimately futile war took a harsh toll on its participants. People began to realize that humankind was not making the kind of progress it had optimistically hoped to be making. The status quo America had enjoyed was no more. In addition, the camaraderie forced between the soldiers due to harsh conditions made the assimilation to normal society particularly difficult. Amidst the rubble of Western civilization, many great writers came to the forefront. Patriotism, religion, and traditional values weren't enough anymore.

engl352 / Postwar Disillusionment

CHRISTIAN MINISTRY COMPLICIT IN WW1,WW1 JINGOISM AND US CHURCH,WW1 JINGOISM AND AMERICAN CHRISTIAN LEADERS,ANTI-WAR CHURCH 1917,ANTI-WW 1 ATTITUDE 1917,WW 1 PACIFIST MOVEMENT 1917,RELIGION DURING WARTIME,CHRISTIANITY DURING WW1,CHRISTIANITY DURING WW

 

[1robin]

I have shorten your text sorry for it but i found it irrelevant to reply on the other things you said.

Some things you consider being truth doesn't add up or make any sense even in modern or historical times Secularism is more violent then both together and we both know there are no real Islamic or Christian states so why are we talking about things that do not exist?

F0uad I agree that secular forces like evolutionary thought or Atheistic utopian ideals have killed many people. Since me and you both defend a religion this would be irrelevant. There are what I believe to be Islamic states. Islam is as much a state system as it is a religous one. Most Jurice Prudence in the middle east is based primarily on Shariah. However there are no strictly Christian countries these days. Since it would be meaningless to address how much violence is done by the US because we are not a strictly Christian group. I was attempting to return the curtesy and not use Islamic states because you can't use western countries even though there are Islamic states but no Christian states. Regardless there are Christian Groups you could use to make your point if you have one. You could show that the Catholics have caused violence, or the methodists killed many people, the same way I can show Alqaeda or Hamas killed people.

Just to see whos truth adds up I would like you to clarify your claim that Christians killed 200 million natives. What natives? When? Where? And you can pick any point I made and I will back it up. Fair enough.

 

[1robin]

1robin wrote:

I did not see the word Christian or theology any where in there.

I did not claim Islam killed 50million people because they were in the wauffen SS that killed the jews.

By your rational, I could blame WW2 on dogs because the US and others used them to hunt out bombs and soldiers hiding out.

My claim concerns violence by a mojority religous group for religous reasons. Even that should be clarified even more but I don't have time right now.

My reply:

The reason I quoted the wiki article was because of the casualities among Christian countries ...many with the state religion being Christian. . I think some of the pessimism about religion in europe was largely caused by the tremendous casualties and disillusionment caused by the war.

Ultimately more than 70 million military personnel, including 60 million Europeans, were mobilised in one of the largest wars in history.[7][8] More than 9 million combatants were killed, largely because of great technological advances in firepower without corresponding advances in mobility. It was the sixth-deadliest conflict in world history, subsequently paving the way for various political changes such as revolutions in the nations involved.[9]

World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the horrors of battle confronted in the ultimately futile war took a harsh toll on its participants. People began to realize that humankind was not making the kind of progress it had optimistically hoped to be making. The status quo America had enjoyed was no more. In addition, the camaraderie forced between the soldiers due to harsh conditions made the assimilation to normal society particularly difficult. Amidst the rubble of Western civilization, many great writers came to the forefront. Patriotism, religion, and traditional values weren't enough anymore.

engl352 / Postwar Disillusionment

CHRISTIAN MINISTRY COMPLICIT IN WW1,WW1 JINGOISM AND US CHURCH,WW1 JINGOISM AND AMERICAN CHRISTIAN LEADERS,ANTI-WAR CHURCH 1917,ANTI-WW 1 ATTITUDE 1917,WW 1 PACIFIST MOVEMENT 1917,RELIGION DURING WARTIME,CHRISTIANITY DURING WW1,CHRISTIANITY DURING WW

I am extremely familiar with the great wars. I don't know what you are saying here. Is there a point you are trying to make, or did you just want to make sure that everyone is aware that ww1 happend and there were some Christians in it (even though the reason they were there has nothing to with religion) along with people from virtually every race and religion in the world.

 

[A Troubled Man]

You have to clarify because your mixing the ''Conquest'' with expansions, Mohammed(saws) didn't took over countries he only controlled Arabia.

First of all, your constant use of a facepalm is quite disingenuous.

Secondly, it would have been called the Muslim Expansions rather than the Muslim Conquests. The word "Conquest" is used for a very good reason. Is there some misunderstanding of the term you're having?

What are you saying did you ever took time to do some research into Islamic golden age?

Yes, I did, it was sparked from a barrage of Islamic propagandists extolling the virtues and booty of the Muslim Conquests.

It was actually spreading wealth and purity to the whole religion. Its called ''Golden Age'' what refers to a wealth time where in the opposite the Christians lived in dark-ages and Churches denounced different thinking people and mostly killed them, science was prohibited and many Jews were presuceted just look at the Spanish Catholics or the Bytainze empire where the ''Muslim Expansions'' actually freed them and were celebrated by taking over.

Whatever Muslims were "spreading" it most certainly wasn't theirs to begin with but was instead booty plundered from other countries they conquered.

 

[arthra]

I am extremely familiar with the great wars. I don't know what you are saying here. Is there a point you are trying to make, or did you just want to make sure that everyone is aware that ww1 happend and there were some Christians in it (even though the reason they were there has nothing to with religion) along with people from virtually every race and religion in the world.

The point being my friend it was violence among Christians....! this caused disillusionment with religion and the rise of Communism in Russia..as a professional historian I thought you'd be interested.