Do Muslims commonly proselytize?

originally posted by: Wombocracy

You think you are funny?

Islam does not do that and you are a receptor for propaganda.

Buy the lie, is that how you roll?

Proud to be able to tell the truth about Islam being a wonderful religion no worse or better than Christianity.

When water boarding was going on, was that a Christian thing? It was a war thing.

So Islam is no more responsible for terrorism than Christianity is for starting a war by lying about wmd's.

Smarten up. We are not all ignorant enough to buy into the propaganda why are you?

. . .

Wellllllllllllll FYI . . .

My rommate for more than a year was a Muslim.

He researched the origins of Islam extensively. His findings ended up being the vast bulk of the information that Walid Shoebat (sp?) used in his book--without attribution or payment, sadly.

shoebat.com...

He was one of the millions of descendants of Mohammed.

And my assertion was consistent with his perspective about a large percentage of Islam.

You may deny the facts all you wish.

It won't change the facts.

Thanks for the gratuitous insults, however. They add to my extensive collection of notches on my keyboard.

a reply to: Ellie Sagan

Good.

I guess I took your question as a more generalized question about the religion as a whole vs that one individual.

a reply to: Wombocracy

I realize the facts may not scratch your surface . . . however . . .

www.dailymail.co.uk...

a reply to: BO XIAN

Christians are doing the same to Muslims they all have been doing it for years.

www.christiantoday.com...

a reply to: Wombocracy

Evidently you are not as into truth as you purport to be.

The RCC was plenty horrible and brutal during the Inquisition.

Nevertheless, taken as a whole, the RCC, even during the Inquisition

has never been AS RUTHLESS, BRUTAL, TORTURING, ETC. of as many people as intensely as Major portions of Islam have and are currently being around the world.

It may be that the oligarchy is using Islam to help destroy the other religions to make setting up the one world satanic religion easier and sooner.

It may be that the oligarchy will morph Islam into a MORE satanic religion as soon as workable. It STARTED OUT THAT WAY well before Muhammed was born. It was a satan worshiping moon cult that Muhammed morphed into Islam as a major route to conquest and wealth . . . as well as to control people.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Christians are doing the same to Muslims they all have been doing it for years.

www.christiantoday.com...

double

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
a reply to: BO XIAN

Christians are doing the same to Muslims they all have been doing it for years.

www.christiantoday.com...

No. Christianity does not teach coercion. The New Testament teaches very plainly against it.

People with the label of Christian do all manner of things. Labels are not always accurate. Particularly the "Christian" one.

However, I realize that you have a thing about it and will believe what you will.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Does not teach it but in practice have forcibly converted many for hundreds of years.
Both religions have done it and will continue to do so.

a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

It is a vain and futile effort to

EQUATE

the blood-lust demands of Islam

with even the worst of inauthentic "Christians" now or in history.

I realize it suits your agenda and biases, however.

a reply to: BO XIAN

You do realize millions of Muslims also call people who do bad stuff in the name of islam "inauthentic".
Your own Bias and agenda is very telling.

a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

Trouble is

The founding documents of Islam have more than 100 verses exhorting to blood-lust violence, murder, genocide etc. toward and of non-Muslims.

You can pretend otherwise until the cows come home. It won't change the FACTS.

The New Testament does NOT have a single verse remotely encouraging such.

Again . . .

EQUATING the two on the violence issue is utter irrational nonsense.

Violent Jihadi's are logically acting out many dozens of verses in their founding documents.

Violent Christians are violating their founding documents.

Yet you irrationally !!!DEMAND!!!

EQUATING the two.

Sheesh.

a reply to: BO XIAN

My friend, the New Testament isn't the only 'founding document' of Christianity is it?

a reply to: Kandinsky

I suppose it depends on how one slices the terms.

It is accurate to say that the NEW Testament IS THE founding document of CHRISTIANITY.

It is also accurate to say that Christians consider and treat the OLD Testament as God's Word as well.

That, as we all know, opens up a ton of hot button issues. Some would think that's reasonable and fair and some would not.

= = = =

Related . . . but also difficult to articulate and discuss rationally . . .

is our Western culture and the oligarchy fostered particularly American RELIGIOUS DOGMA

that

"there is NO RIGHT OR WRONG, ALL IS RELATIVE; Man is nothing more than a rat, a pigeon, a radish or a rock."

Given THAT RELIGIOUS dogma . . . and it's vast and deep impacts . . . it has become, in the public square, virtually archaic to think that it might even be remotely possible

for there to be

an ALMIGHTY GOD YEHOVAH who created AND DEFINES all the rights and wrongs that truly and lastingly exist in any sense of the word.

IF, as I am utterly convinced of,

The God of the Bible (OT & NT) truly exists and truly is ALMIGHTY SUPREME GOD ABOVE ALL GODS,

THEN

Whatever HE declares and does, by definition, as outlined in the OT OR NT . . . is right and good.

That includes the genocidal destruction of tribal groups that were polluted with fallen angel DNA.

I understand that THAT brings forth much frothing at the mouth and raging rants about how cruel etc. God must be etc. etc. etc. I understand their rationale.

That's not my experience of HIM.

I think it is somewhat the height of arrogance for mortal man to judge God. We don't have enough information. We have not been there in the beginning. We don't have a perch high enough. We don't begin to have enough authority to judge God.

= = =

In terms of Islam vs Christianity . . . EVEN IF one considers the violence Yehovah ordered in the OT . . . it is

STILL ENORMOUSLY DIFFERENT

from the BLANKET EXHORTATIONS in many dozens of verses in Islam's founding documents to exterminate all unbelievers who will not convert. That's as in ALL.

Not several tribes with fallen angel DNA--ALL--humans who will not convert to Islam.

Denial of that distinction is . . . hypocrisy, imho.

It has been said that . . . Oh, but Christianity teaches that after Armageddon, there will be no other religions; all evil doers will be removed from the planet etc.

Right.

But WHO does all that? It is certainly NOT mortals running around loose & willy nilly doing their own thing with sharp, bloody blades in the name of Christianity a la after the pattern of Islam.

Yehovah and His angel armies and evidently Believers will battle at Armageddon. But it IS God's doing, not individual "true believers" doing their own thing with a sword.

And, Armageddon IS the ultimate battle of all battles between good and evil--though it's hardly a battle of equals. It's more to be a dramatic squashing of satan and his forces--fallen angel and mortal humans.

So in that sense, it is the special case of all special cases.

My main quibble is an utter 100% EQUATING

of things that are far from 100% EQUAL.

a reply to: BO XIAN

I believe most Christians and Muslims aren't militant or extremist in their beliefs or actions. It's somewhat like a regression to the mean in the sense of the majority of humans live mostly good lives no matter what a sample of Westboro Baptists or Taliban initially suggests. We tend to use the extremists as templates to understand the belief systems of others. However, if we could survey populations of millions the 'extremism' would be outweighed by moderates and the 'regression' would become apparent.

My point about the OT is we could be two fundamentalist Muslims posting quotations from Scripture as evidence that Christianity is violent and intolerant. It's relativism in its most neutral form rather than me seeking to slur Christianity or to excuse the excesses of Islam.

It's a fraught topic to discuss and liable to inflame emotions.

a reply to: Kandinsky

THANKS.

Plenty true. Plenty true.

The extremes and the emotional triggers are critical issues.

a reply to: BO XIAN

You're a good man and calm minds are those that will prevail in the end

a reply to: Kandinsky

Thanks for your kind words.

However, I'm sure it would take you all of 60 seconds to find a well populated group hereon that would love to have my head on a spike! LOL.

Being a very strange bird of rare plumage with strong atypical perspectives, beliefs and style has a way of being a lightening rod for hostility. Been that way most of my life--and doesn't matter if I'm presenting as a thoroughly agreeable, mild, pleasant and polite wall flower, or not.

I admit it's not easy to maintain that persona for more than 4-8 consecutive hours in most contexts. LOL.

I finally, after too many decades . . . and particularly at my age . . . decided I may as well be comfortable in my own skin and be myself. It never worked well to attempt any other persona.

I am glad, however, that I no longer run around whacking folks in the head with a thick Bible . . . so to speak. That was tiring, unwise, unthoughtful, unkind and useless.

Though face to face . . . some sensitive folks feel whacked upside the head just looking into my eyes. Lots of students commented that they felt I could see right through them. Sometimes I had to dial the intensity down several notches for some very sensitive folks.

Life can sure be interesting.

Thanks for your kind comments.

LUB

I’m not seeing any relevance to Islam going by the opening post, sounds more like Jehovah’s Witnesses if anything since they are very much opposed to the concept of the Holy Trinity. Definitely not Mormons, they do promote the idea.

Either way, when I saw “proselytize” in the title I pretty much guessed right away that it would not be anything to do with Islam. Yes Muslims might publicly preach but it’s very unlikely in a sense of proselytizing. That kind of thing is more specific to somebody like a Missionary, but as I said it could not be Mormons because they would effectively do the complete opposite in promoting the idea of the Godhead, it is in their pamphlets. I don’t know a great deal about Witnesses but I’ll hazard a guess that it would have been them.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Do you think that more controlled media propaganda is "truth."

Makes anything you say worthless because you are just being a drone by accepting what you are told and doing what they want. Tool.