Originally posted by Robert Plomp
View Post
The literal style of the Old Testament is a completely different one then the style of the Quran.
In the Quran the text is setup as if the reader is being adressed directly, without a context.
The Old Testament styles are more about someone telling a tale about in some context something happened.
It's quite a difference if you read: "Go out and kill all people" or "And God told Moses to go out there and kill all Egyptians who are chasing you"
While both may both be equally violent, the first one is far more easier to be interpertated as a personal order to one of the current readers, while the 2nd one is harder to be understood that way.
Bottom line is that the Quran suffers from this style, b/c in it's context and time Muhammed isn't that evil at all. He's actually more noble then other military leaders of his time. But b/c of the literal style of the Quran, the context is completely lost. And therefore Muslims are far more eager to use violence.
History teaches that christians who have used violence often can be described as being not very christian in their daily life, but just using religion as a tool to achieve their own selfish goals. There aren't many examples of very devoted christians who used the sword. Mostly it's about powerhungry kings. (a bit in the style of Saddam Hussain and Khadaffi, for example, who also abused Islam for their own crazy reasons).
People like OBL, in example, or Ahmedinejad, actually are/were devoted muslims though who are as as matter of fact orthodox muslims.
The main difference of course between Christianity and Islam is that Muhammed was a religious, military AND political leader. And Muslims must live like him. Jesus was just only a religious leader who clearly opposed violence and clearly stated that the his followers should listen to the laws of the emperor.
That's the key difference.
That doesn't mean that any christian can't be as violent as any muslim.
But the nature of the religions are completely different. Jews are a bit in between the both of them.
In the Quran the text is setup as if the reader is being adressed directly, without a context.
The Old Testament styles are more about someone telling a tale about in some context something happened.
It's quite a difference if you read: "Go out and kill all people" or "And God told Moses to go out there and kill all Egyptians who are chasing you"
While both may both be equally violent, the first one is far more easier to be interpertated as a personal order to one of the current readers, while the 2nd one is harder to be understood that way.
Bottom line is that the Quran suffers from this style, b/c in it's context and time Muhammed isn't that evil at all. He's actually more noble then other military leaders of his time. But b/c of the literal style of the Quran, the context is completely lost. And therefore Muslims are far more eager to use violence.
History teaches that christians who have used violence often can be described as being not very christian in their daily life, but just using religion as a tool to achieve their own selfish goals. There aren't many examples of very devoted christians who used the sword. Mostly it's about powerhungry kings. (a bit in the style of Saddam Hussain and Khadaffi, for example, who also abused Islam for their own crazy reasons).
People like OBL, in example, or Ahmedinejad, actually are/were devoted muslims though who are as as matter of fact orthodox muslims.
The main difference of course between Christianity and Islam is that Muhammed was a religious, military AND political leader. And Muslims must live like him. Jesus was just only a religious leader who clearly opposed violence and clearly stated that the his followers should listen to the laws of the emperor.
That's the key difference.
That doesn't mean that any christian can't be as violent as any muslim.
But the nature of the religions are completely different. Jews are a bit in between the both of them.

Comment