Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

gaffo
Posts: 2377
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by gaffo » Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:01 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:08 am
gaffo wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:35 pm
Immanuel Can wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 4:07 pm

Just so, you've got to look beyond the individuals trying to practice the ideology, and ask what the ideology itself rationalizes.
fair point. you affirm good individuals acting morally in spite of thier culture/religion.
That's not quite my point. It's a possible point, but not the right one here.

The point is this: ideologies incline people to move toward certain kinds of actions, and away from others. Some people do not take their ideology very seriously, and so may do something that is not consonant with their professed ideology. But anybody who takes the particularly ideology seriously, and tries to act consistently with what it teaches, will be inclined to do certain things.

That's what makes "what the ideology rationalizes" very important. It tells you what sort of "certain things" the ideology itself will incline people toward.
so doctrine/religion is irrelivant!
Quite the opposite.

Doctrine tells us what the religion will exhort/encourage/direct people to do. Now, they may or may not follow through on it -- usually, some do, and some don't -- but the doctrine tells you what it will be. That is, if the religion or ideology is allowed to have the effect it desires upon ordinary folks, what will they end up being like?

And if the thing toward which the doctrine exhorts/encourages/ directs people is a BAD thing, then that tells you all you need to know about whether or not you're wise to tolerate the ideology. And if it's a GOOD thing, that tells you all you need to know about that.
I understand your argument, just fully reject it.

per history:

French christians in algerian (Muslims) war, the former were full on more thuggish than the latter.

same with the Belgian Congo.

we will have to disagree on this mindset. I say character defines persons and religion is irrelivent, you say the opposite.

so be it.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6305
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:07 am

gaffo wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:01 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:08 am
gaffo wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:35 pm


fair point. you affirm good individuals acting morally in spite of thier culture/religion.
That's not quite my point. It's a possible point, but not the right one here.

The point is this: ideologies incline people to move toward certain kinds of actions, and away from others. Some people do not take their ideology very seriously, and so may do something that is not consonant with their professed ideology. But anybody who takes the particularly ideology seriously, and tries to act consistently with what it teaches, will be inclined to do certain things.

That's what makes "what the ideology rationalizes" very important. It tells you what sort of "certain things" the ideology itself will incline people toward.
so doctrine/religion is irrelivant!
Quite the opposite.

Doctrine tells us what the religion will exhort/encourage/direct people to do. Now, they may or may not follow through on it -- usually, some do, and some don't -- but the doctrine tells you what it will be. That is, if the religion or ideology is allowed to have the effect it desires upon ordinary folks, what will they end up being like?

And if the thing toward which the doctrine exhorts/encourages/ directs people is a BAD thing, then that tells you all you need to know about whether or not you're wise to tolerate the ideology. And if it's a GOOD thing, that tells you all you need to know about that.
I understand your argument, just fully reject it.
On what basis?

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:09 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:30 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 3:55 am
Your thinking in the above case is too shallow and narrow.
You need to break down and analyze the issue critically in their various components and perspectives.
It's nowhere near that complex, LV. You're "gilding the lily," adding ornamentation where there is no necessity.

It's this simple: a "Christian" (the word means "little Christs," and was given not by Christians themselves but by people outside their group, at Antioch. Acts 11:26), is one who is, on a smaller scale, what Christ was on the large scale. If his character and behaviour are different, then he's not being a "little Christ." Hence, he's not acting as a "Christian" at all.

Jesus Christ Himself repeatedly instructed us to judge between the true and the insincere claimants by this very means (Matt. 7:20, Luke 6:46, John 8:47...). So anybody who doesn't think that's the right way to do it has an argument with Christ Himself, not me.
How can they be "little Christs" if they do not have any reference to ground on.
Obviously the "little Christs" has to conform to the the expectation of the 'Big Christ' and God otherwise how do they know whether they are doing the right or the wrong thing.
The sole authoritative commands and text is the Gospel of the 'Big Christ' i.e. Jesus Christ as reported by the 4 apostles.

You stated;
"Jesus Christ Himself repeatedly instructed us to judge ..."
by what grounding, standard or authority?
The only available standards are in the Gospel of Jesus Christs as reported by the 4 apostles who were to closest to Jesus.
  • 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

    14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Thus in principle and technically, to get to the Father to gain everlasting life, the only source of authority of the above has to be from Jesus Christ which is represented essentially in the Gospel of Jesus Christ as referenced to the 4 apostles who had direct association with Jesus Christ.

The Acts and Epistles are written by people who do not have close and long association with Jesus Christ, thus cannot be reliable.

Therefore what is Christianity is solely represented by the Gospel of Jesus Christ as reported by the 4 apostles and to be a Christian, one has to accept the offer of Jesus Christ/God as in John 3:16 or the likes.
The acceptance by the person of the offer implied a personal contract and personal relationship is established between Jesus/God with the person.
The terms of the personal contract are solely in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

To be a 'Christian' do not just mean to be 'little Christ' which is not effective at all if there is no reference to ground what 'little Christ' represents.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6305
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:16 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:09 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:30 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 3:55 am
Your thinking in the above case is too shallow and narrow.
You need to break down and analyze the issue critically in their various components and perspectives.
It's nowhere near that complex, LV. You're "gilding the lily," adding ornamentation where there is no necessity.

It's this simple: a "Christian" (the word means "little Christs," and was given not by Christians themselves but by people outside their group, at Antioch. Acts 11:26), is one who is, on a smaller scale, what Christ was on the large scale. If his character and behaviour are different, then he's not being a "little Christ." Hence, he's not acting as a "Christian" at all.

Jesus Christ Himself repeatedly instructed us to judge between the true and the insincere claimants by this very means (Matt. 7:20, Luke 6:46, John 8:47...). So anybody who doesn't think that's the right way to do it has an argument with Christ Himself, not me.
How can they be "little Christs" if they do not have any reference to ground on.
They do. Christ Himself.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:29 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:13 am
Sculptor wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 8:25 pm
Christopher Hitchens...
I know you are clearly a person of limited life experience, but just take the trouble to listen through to his offering.
Oh, no. I know Hitchens. I've heard everything he's got to say.

He knows he was wrong now.

I wonder if you really know him, though. This will help you know how he ended things.

https://www.amazon.com/Faith-Christophe ... 0718091493
As far as is known Hitchens remained an [a]theist till his death.

However I do not agree with Hitchens if he blamed the evil and violent acts of people who claimed to be Christians on Christianity.

The Christians response to the above should be;
  • We [Christians] entered into a personal contract with Jesus/God where the terms of the contract of being a Christian of Christianity include a pacifist overriding maxim, 'love all - even enemies.' As such any one who claimed to be a Christian and kill other humans cannot be acting on behalf of Christianity.
Analogy;
Say, a person signed a contract with organization Q as a Q-tian wherein it is specified in the contract the code of conduct is stealing [provable in a court] is regarded as serious misconduct.
Now if the Q-tian is convicted of stealing while on the job, we cannot blame the organization Q at all.

The above principle is applicable to Christians who killed, i.e. we cannot blame Christianity per se for the crimes of murder by Christians.
Another point is anyone [from potential crooks to saints] can be a Christian very easily, i.e. just accept John 3:16 and get baptized or other initiation into Christianity.

nothing
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:32 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by nothing » Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:30 am

No.

"Islamophobia" is a projection of the fear within the House of Islam twofold:
i. Irrational fear by Muslims of Allah (being a concoction of Muhammad)
ii. Rational fear by leaders of Islam who are deliberately covering up problems with Islam: the Qur'an (ie. so-called perfection is actually a bloody mess) and the history of Islam re: Mecca not having existed at the time of Muhammad and all mosques built up until ~730 CE having qiblas (direction of prayer) facing Petra, instead of Mecca. That means Muhammad could not have established prayer towards Mecca, and all Muslims are facing the wrong direction while praying. The leaders of Islam can't let the Muslims know about this because it would collapse the House of Islam. Therefor, they suppress any/all criticisms of Islam by labeling everyone else an Islamophobe, but this is exactly what the House of Islam itself suffers.

This fear is projected outward onto any/all that criticize Islam, because Islam has an inborn pathology of blaming others for what Islam is itself guilty of. It is identical to the biblical Mark of Cain: pathological scapegoating/blaming others for ones own crimes (ie. the accuser is the accused). The House of Islam can not help but constantly accuse, accuse and accuse others of what they are themselves guilty of. It is as China correctly designated: a kind of cancer. Sorry to the "believers" in/of Islam, but it is "belief"-based ignorance and destructive to humanity.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:32 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:16 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:09 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:30 pm

It's nowhere near that complex, LV. You're "gilding the lily," adding ornamentation where there is no necessity.

It's this simple: a "Christian" (the word means "little Christs," and was given not by Christians themselves but by people outside their group, at Antioch. Acts 11:26), is one who is, on a smaller scale, what Christ was on the large scale. If his character and behaviour are different, then he's not being a "little Christ." Hence, he's not acting as a "Christian" at all.

Jesus Christ Himself repeatedly instructed us to judge between the true and the insincere claimants by this very means (Matt. 7:20, Luke 6:46, John 8:47...). So anybody who doesn't think that's the right way to do it has an argument with Christ Himself, not me.
How can they be "little Christs" if they do not have any reference to ground on.
They do. Christ Himself.
Yes, Christ Himself, but from where if not from the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Are you implying any one can be a Christian then define on their own what 'Christ-Himself' represent without reference to the Gospel?

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:36 am

nothing wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:30 am
No.

"Islamophobia" is a projection of the fear within the House of Islam twofold:
i. Irrational fear by Muslims of Allah (being a concoction of Muhammad)
ii. Rational fear by leaders of Islam who are deliberately covering up problems with Islam: the Qur'an (ie. so-called perfection is actually a bloody mess) and the history of Islam re: Mecca not having existed at the time of Muhammad and all mosques built up until ~730 CE having qiblas (direction of prayer) facing Petra, instead of Mecca.
That means Muhammad could not have established prayer towards Mecca, and all Muslims are facing the wrong direction while praying.
The leaders of Islam can't let the Muslims know about this because it would collapse the House of Islam.
Therefor, they suppress any/all criticisms of Islam by labeling everyone else an Islamophobe, but this is exactly what the House of Islam itself suffers.

This fear is projected outward onto any/all that criticize Islam, because Islam has an inborn pathology of blaming others for what Islam is itself guilty of. It is identical to the biblical Mark of Cain: pathological scapegoating/blaming others for ones own crimes (ie. the accuser is the accused). The House of Islam can not help but constantly accuse, accuse and accuse others of what they are themselves guilty of.

It is as China correctly designated: a kind of cancer. Sorry to the "believers" in/of Islam, but it is "belief"-based ignorance and destructive to humanity.
I agree with the above.
The idea of the fear projected outward by Muslims from their own internal fears is a good one.

That the ideology of Islam is malignant, cancerous, evil and violent can be objectively inferred from the 6236 verses of the Quran, the ultimate authority of Islam.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6305
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:47 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:29 am
As far as is known Hitchens remained an [a]theist till his death.
He did. And the book is quite fair about that. But it's very interesting to see how his friendship with the author changed his attitude, as well. Hitchens was not a man with a fixed view: he was a man in transition. He had started by being very hard-hearted, but at the end was asking serious questions of himself. He was better than the angry, closed-minded person he seemed to be in public.
The above principle is applicable to Christians who killed, i.e. we cannot blame Christianity per se for the crimes of murder by Christians.
According to Jesus Christ Himself, anybody who murdered "in His name" actually did it in their own name. And that's the point. Someone who does not do what Christ told them to do is not acting as one of His. And real Christians who did as Christ told them cannot be blamed for the actions of people who, for merely strategic purposes, identified themselves as "Christian," but because they were not sincere, did not invest any obedience in being that.

The kind of faith that saves is committed to action. The faith that does not save is not active, and is no more than a moving of the lips rather than of the heart and life.
Another point is anyone [from potential crooks to saints] can be a Christian very easily, i.e. just accept John 3:16
Pretty much that's where you need to stop that sentence. Christians do not believe that baptism or church initiation is crucial. They are good things to do, but optional, and not salvific in themselves.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6305
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:50 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:32 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:16 am
They do. Christ Himself.
Yes, Christ Himself, but from where if not from the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Are you implying any one can be a Christian then define on their own what 'Christ-Himself' represent without reference to the Gospel?
No, of course not. None of us knows anything about Christ except what we have there. There is definite mention of Him in a few outside sources, like Josephus, but very little detail. If we know Christ at all, it's from the Bible.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6305
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Oct 21, 2019 6:23 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:54 am
A phobia is an irrational fear.

Image

Can anyone prove me wrong on the above?
We can simplify your question.

Taking out the factor of WHAT ideology has been associated with these acts, and given that a good many of these acts produced considerably more than one death, one could simply ask the following question:

Given that an ideology -- any ideology -- were responsible for 35814 terrorist acts, issuing in much destruction and many more injuries and deaths, is it "phobic" to be concerned?

And the obvious answer would be "No: it would be totally reasonable, and unreasonable not to be concerned," regardless of the name of the ideology in question.

So the question that now needs to be asked is, "Is there any causal link between the ideology in question and the acts perpetrated?" That's the only really important question here.

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 680
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Sculptor » Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:23 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:45 pm
Sculptor wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:31 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:30 pm

So what you are saying is you are paranoid?
Projection.
I'm not the one seeing a terrorist behind every mosque.
I am not either, but I dont go around seeing every as "no different from any other prospective terrorist."
Calling you a prospective terrorist is not paranoia. I've no fear of terrorism.
I've more change of dying from a bizarre washing machine accident.
You are just paranioacally responding to the media hysteria.

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 680
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Sculptor » Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:26 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:13 am
Sculptor wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 8:25 pm
Christopher Hitchens...
I know you are clearly a person of limited life experience, but just take the trouble to listen through to his offering.
Oh, no. I know Hitchens. I've heard everything he's got to say.

He knows he was wrong now.
He knows nothing you ignoramous. He's been dead for years.

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 680
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Sculptor » Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:28 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:46 am
Sculptor wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:21 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 3:55 am

Your thinking in the above case is too shallow and narrow.
You need to break down and analyze the issue critically in their various components and perspectives.

A 'Christian' [as defined] is one who has entered into a personal contract with God/Jesus to comply with the terms of the contract stipulated solely with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
So, Luther, Servetus, Popes, bishops, and all luminaries of the church, and anyone are 'Christian' if they were baptized and entered into personal contract with God/Jesus.

But the point is while the above are contractually Christians, they are also a human being with human nature which inherently has the potential to commit evil and violence. They may also enter into other contracts within their personal life.

A person as a contracted-Christian may enter into a contract as a soldier or policemen where the contractual terms allow killing under justified circumstances.
In this case, when the person killed enemies in a legal war, he is not acting as a contracted-Christian but as a contracted soldier or policemen.
In this case of sinning against the contract of being a Christian, it is up the person to face God/Jesus' judgment, wrath or forgiveness on Judgment Day.
It is wrong to accuse Christianity itself if a contracted-Christian sinned in killing other humans.



The contract terms that bind the Christian included an overriding pacifist maxim 'love all - even enemies'.

Therefore if Luther and others who acted outside the contractual terms as a Christian, e.g. hating and killing non-Christians, they cannot be acting as Christians per se.
Instead they are acting outside the scope of Christianity as human being and upon the human nature of evil and violence.

On the other hand, when contracted-Muslims killed in the name of Allah and Islam upon conditions of threats to the religion, their killing and violence are sanctioned by Allah with specific verses from the 6236 verses of the Quran. They are killing in accordance to the terms of contract as contracted-Muslims.
Christians are what Christianity has done.
I would never allow myself to be associated with that inhuman death cult.
You have not established the definition of "what is Christianity" and 'who is a Christian' in accordance to the Gospels, how can your statements above be valid and true?
I've no need to establish a definition.
Just as no one here as done that for Islam.
I'm a historian, the evidence of "christians" is manifold as so are the self-definitions too.

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 680
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Is the Critique of Islam Islamophobic?

Post by Sculptor » Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:30 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:01 am
gaffo wrote:
Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:29 am
Sculptor wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:44 pm
Whilst I agree that Islam is violent, it is less so than Judaism,
agreed, both faiths are violent (and identical theologically).
Wow. Couldn't be more wrong, and evidently, verifiably so. Amazing.
Keep your head in the sand idiot

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests