American Arrogance Rooted in Christian Beliefs

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by aneeshm
You apparently do not grasp the Islamic mindset . They do no look at the Koran and say , "Let us judge this book and its messenger in the modern context" . They say , "Let us judge modernity in the context of the Book and the Prophet" , because to them , the Quran and Prophet's actions are the standard of morality .

Often they do not follow everything the Quran says like slaves either. That's just not true - I've been to some muslim countries, and the people there are a whole lot more different than you paint them here. And we have plenty of muslim people in Europe as well, and often they are quite "westernized", but still muslim - if they can change, why would it be impossible for others? It may be indeed difficult to modernize Islam on a grand scale, but that is not only a question of religion itself, but also of power and politics (something we did not discussed noe here at all).

It is the word of God , so it it eternal and unchanging . The awe that a Muslim feels when reading the Quran is because they are taught that the Quran is the ultimate book , and the Prophet the last messenger .

Even if they do so now, I still see do not much of a difference in this views compared to Christian views of God and the bible some hundred years ago. Back then the bible was seen as the ultimate source for truth as well.

And another thing - did Jesus explicitly give the Roman Catholic Church the power to interpret the Bible ?

In Islam , the prophet and the book justify each other .

I don't know about Jesus, but I still don't see thas as a core point, more a "technical" thing. The bible was seen as the word of God - and if the church had been given the authority explicitly or not plays only a minor role IMO, because in fact the church had the power to execute this kind of authority, and a vast majority of people believed in it.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

I half agree with Ted, American Arrogance is rooted in belief of God. How dare we!!!

When in the Course of human Events it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth the separate & equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation. We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness:

Ted Striker, Not even worth a rating. Meh.

[C0ckney]

Originally posted by aneeshm


Yes . Aneesh Mulye does . How is that relevant , exactly ?

it makes it easier to see where you are coming from, and indeed where the stuff you spout is coming from :/

and dr strangelove is right about bali etc.

[Jon Miller]

Christians are taught that the Bible is the ultimate book (Except the Mormons..)

what they take ultimate to mean, can vary..

and there might be a few who don't regard it as one

Jon Miller

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by BeBro


Often they do not follow everything the Quran says like slaves either. That's just not true - I've been to some muslim countries, and the people there are a whole lot more different than you paint them here. And we have plenty of muslim people in Europe as well, and often they are quite "westernized", but still muslim - if they can change, why would it be impossible for others? It may be indeed difficult to modernize Islam on a grand scale, but that is not only a question of religion itself, but also of power and politics (something we did not discussed noe here at all).



Even if they do so now, I still see do not much of a difference in this views compared to Christian views of God and the bible some hundred years ago. Back then the bible was seen as the ultimate source for truth as well.

Yep, that´s also IMHO the difference.
Nowadays muslims are sometimes like christians some hundred years ago (especially the fundamentalists of course).
And, as the christian society, the muslim society can also evolve to get more secular (and open to other religions).
(AFAIR it was even more open during medieval times as it is (wichin countries ruled by muslim fundamentalists) today)

That we don´t have some kind of influental terrorist network among christian fundamentalists (in contrary to the terrorist network of fundemantalist muslims) might also have something to do with the influence of society.
In western civilizations individual terrorist actions normally aren´t viewed as a legal form of agression (in contrast perhaps to some muslim societies [society != state]). Only actions by the state (for example wars) are considered legal. Perhaps some crusader from the 13th century might have a different view on this.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by C0ckney


it makes it easier to see where you are coming from, and indeed where the stuff you spout is coming from :/

and dr strangelove is right about bali etc.

Ahhh . . . . . . now I understand . It's and old trick . . . . . the Brits call it "playing the man and not the ball" . You can't refute my arguments , so you try to discredit me .

Also called "Ad homimen" . Unfortunately for you , however , it won't work on me . Also , you use works to evoke an image - by the use of the word spout , for example , you try to lump me in with other people wo "spout" stuff , and whose arguments can be dismissed as "spouting" .

Just in case you were not aware - during Islamic times ( approx. 600 years ) , it was the Brahmins ( my caste ) which were persecuted the most - because they were the intellectual guardians of Hinduism . They also suffered the most vile atrocities , because they refused to convert . Hinduism survived only because of them .

Though I do agree with the point you do not want to state - oppression existed , and still does exist ( in the villages ) . Your attempt to lump me in with oppresors is , however , pathetic and unsportsmanlike in debate .


As for the Bali thing - proof , please ?

[Bereta_Eder]

this the problem with some religions, mainly themonotheistic ones I think. they view "love" as trying to get everyone to their "truth".

[Bereta_Eder]

of course to them it isnt a "problem".
as long as they adhere to the system of law of the countrry. however i viewed a documentary about the muslim minority in greece and was apauled to see some cases of cruelty. a large deal of it is due to those backward societies they have there. but i think at least a part comes from the religion of islam. thats why secularism, progress, open societies are the only answer to that kind of situation. although i think protestantism will always produce fanatism even in open societies.

[lord of the mark]

i must say this has to be the best threadjack on poly in a while. The original antiamierican troll has been diverted into a debate about Christianity and Hinduism.

[Bereta_Eder]

antiamericanism is a mute word.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by BeBro


Often they do not follow everything the Quran says like slaves either. That's just not true - I've been to some muslim countries, and the people there are a whole lot more different than you paint them here. And we have plenty of muslim people in Europe as well, and often they are quite "westernized", but still muslim - if they can change, why would it be impossible for others? It may be indeed difficult to modernize Islam on a grand scale, but that is not only a question of religion itself, but also of power and politics (something we did not discussed noe here at all).

Of course Islamic countries cannot fully implement Islamic law - they could not survive in the modern world if they did . One of my best friends is a Muslim . But I have seen the mental torture he has undergone ( and continues to undergo ) as all the leaders of his community tell him that they live in a kafir land , and that all his non-Muslim friends are going to hell , and that all religions other than Islam are of the devil , and that he should not befriend non-Muslims , and that it is his holy duty to kill them all , while on the other hand , all his non-Muslim friends and his school tells him that all religions are equal , and that he is just like one of us , and that none would hesitate to befriend him just because he was a Muslim . It is horrible , what he undergoes .

Even if they do so now, I still see do not much of a difference in this views compared to Christian views of God and the bible some hundred years ago. Back then the bible was seen as the ultimate source for truth as well.


I don't know about Jesus, but I still don't see thas as a core point, more a "technical" thing. The bible was seen as the word of God - and if the church had been given the authority explicitly or not plays only a minor role IMO, because in fact the church had the power to execute this kind of authority, and a vast majority of people believed in it.

In Islam , this same power is decentralised , and given to the local Imam ( while central power resides with the Ameer-al-Mum`in ( the Commander of the Faithful ) , the Khalifah ) .




As for more examples :

The Shahi Imam of Delhi has declared in a speech that , though Muslims do not , in Arabia , slaughter the cow for sacrificial occasions , they should do so in India , because if they do not , then they may start thinking that the cow is sacred ( due to the influence of Hinduism ) , and thus stray from the path of the Book and the Prophet . In essence , kill it because Hindus consider it sacred ( though let me make clear that I do not , myself , consider it sacred , but I am a vegetarian ) . This man is the chief leader of Islam in India .

The Imam in Egypt has declared a fatwa agiains the practice of yog(a) by Muslims , as it is practised by Hindus as a part of their religion , and has declared any Muslim to be practising it to be a sinner and maybe even a gaddar .

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
i must say this has to be the best threadjack on poly in a while. The original antiamierican troll has been diverted into a debate about Christianity and Hinduism.

I have no wish to diss the people of America - a great bunch , on the whole , if you leave out the freaks that exist in every society . America itself is a nice place - you have freedom of speech , action , religion , and over yourself . America's foreign policy , however , does leave a lot to be desired . Which was exactly the point of this thread . And I've addressed just that .

[C0ckney]

what arugments have you made?

that you don't like christians or muslims, wow etc.

that you think they're barbarians, why? because you say so of course!

anything else, ah yes, after you call everyone else 'barbarians' we have your comicial defence of the hindu caste system in india, of course you being a member of a high caste has nothing to do with your rosy view of it...

the hindu caste system

India’s caste system is perhaps the world’s longest surviving social hierarchy. A defining feature of Hinduism, caste encompasses a complex ordering of social groups on the basis of ritual purity.

A person is considered a member of the caste into which he or she is born and remains within that caste until death, although the particular ranking of that caste may vary among regions and over time. Differences in status are traditionally justified by the religious doctrine of karma, a belief that one’s place in life is determined by one’s deeds in previous lifetimes. Traditionalscholarship has described this more than 2,000-year-old system within the context of the four principal varnas, or large caste categories. In order of precedence these are the Brahmins (priests and teachers), the Ksyatriyas (rulers and soldiers), the Vaisyas (merchants and traders), and the Shudras (laborers and artisans). A fifth category falls outside the varna system and consists of those known as “untouchables” or Dalits; they are often assigned tasks too ritually polluting to merit inclusion within the traditional varna system.

Within the four principal castes, there are thousands of sub-castes, also called jatis, endogamous groups that are further divided along occupational, sectarian, regional and linguistic lines. Collectively all of these are sometimes referred to as “caste Hindus” or those falling within the caste system. The Dalits are described as varna-sankara: they are “outside the system”—so inferior to other castes that they are deemed polluting and therefore “untouchable.” Even as outcasts, they themselves are divided into further sub-castes. Although “untouchability” was abolished under Article 17 of the Indian constitution, the practice continues to determine the socio-economic and religious standing of those at the bottom of the caste hierarchy. Whereas the first four varnas are free to choose and change their occupation, Dalits have generally been confined to the occupational structures into which they are born.

The constitution has merely prescribed, but has not given any description of the ground reality. We can make a dent only if we recognise the fact that the caste system is a major source, indeed an obnoxious one, of human rights violations.

With little land of their own to cultivate, Dalit men, women, and children numbering in the tens of millions work as agricultural laborers for a few kilograms of rice or Rs. 15 to Rs. 35 (US$0.38 to $0.88) a day. Most live on the brink of destitution, barely able to feed their families and unable to send their children to school or break away from cycles of debt bondage that are passed on from generation to generation. At the end of day they return to a hut in their Dalit colony with no electricity, kilometers away from the nearest water source, and segregated from all non-Dalits, known as caste Hindus. They are forbidden by caste Hindus to enter places of worship, to draw water from public wells, or to wear shoes in caste Hindu presence. They are made to dig the village graves, dispose of dead animals, clean human waste with their bare hands, and to wash and use separate tea tumblers at neighborhood tea stalls, all because—due to their caste status—they are deemed polluting and therefore “untouchable.” Any attempt to defy the social order is met with violence or economic retaliation.

india's hiden apartheid

For centuries, the untouchables of Paliyad, a nondescript village in western India’s Ahmedabad district, have known their place. Many of them are manual scavengers, cleaning the toilets of upper-caste villagers or toiling the land, sometimes for less than a handful of rice a day. “We’ve known that we must stay away from them [upper-caste people] since the day we were born,” says Rajesh, who is going on 19. “At the tea stalls, we have separate cups to drink from, chipped and caked with dirt, and we’re expected to clean them ourselves. We have to walk for 15 minutes to carry water to our homes, because we’re not allowed to use the taps in the village that the upper castes use. We’re not allowed into temples, and when I attended school, my friends and I were forced to sit just outside the classroom… the upper caste children would not allow us even to touch the football they played with… we played with stones instead.”

More than 160 million people, a sixth of India’s population, continue to bear the burden of a 2,000-year old caste system sanctioned by Hindu theology, which locks people into a rigid role by virtue of their birth.
Codes to suit the upper class. Though the term “untouchables” was abolished in 1950 under India’s constitution, the “oppressed people” or Dalits as they are now referred to, continue to be discriminated against. They are denied access to land, forced to work in humiliating and degrading conditions and are routinely abused by the police and upper-caste groups, which enjoy the state’s protection.

i've got hundreds more, all you have to do is ask.

as for the bali and hindu expansion, you could try reading a history book, lord knows there are enough that deal with this topic.

angkor wat

Located in Northwestern Cambodia, Angkor, the Capital of the Ancient Khmer Empire was possibly founded around the Ninth Century AD by King Jayavarman II. However, the city reached its peak glory in the 12th Century under Kings Suryavarman II and Jayavarman VII. The most beautiful and most famous monument in the city, Angkor Wat, lies about one kilometer south of the Royal town of Angkor Thom which was founded by Jayavarman VII.

The Temple of Angkor Wat was dedicated to the Hindu God Vishnu by King Suryavarman II, who reigned between AD 1131 and 1150. The Temple was constructed over a period of 30 years, and illustrates some of the most beautiful examples of Khmer and Hindu art. Covering an area of about 81 hectares, the complex consists of five towers, which are presently shown on the Cambodian national flag. These towers are believed to represent the five peaks of Mount Meru, the Home of Gods and Center of the Hindu Universe. Angkor Wat features the longest continuous bas-relief in the world, which runs along the outer gallery walls, narrating stories from Hindu Mythology

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
i must say this has to be the best threadjack on poly in a while. The original antiamierican troll has been diverted into a debate about Christianity and Hinduism.

when did i lost that title???

[C0ckney]

and bali of course

The Balinese religion have strong spiritual roots , their culture is still very much alive. The main religion is Hindu Dharma, which arrived in Bali with the spread of Hinduism through Sumatra and Java during the 11th century. Although originally from India, the Balinese religion is a unique blend of Hindu, Buddhist, Javanese and ancient indigenous beliefs, with customs that are very different from the traditional form of Hinduism practiced in India today. With the arrival of Islam in neighboring Java during the 15th century, a large member of courtiers, artists, musicians and craftsmen fled to Bali, creating an artistic renaissance.