American Student goes to Palestine to help only to find out the truth

Grab my heat did ask GTech a question why do you make a fuss about people hating Jews?

Some people would find Grab my heat's question offensive.

However, only the answer was taken as offensive.

Why is that?

 

Gtech's answer is much further than a simple question.
Grabmy is out there, I will admit that right off the bat. I actually question many, many of his posts. His question however is simply a question, nothing compared to what Gtech answered with.

 

I don't know much about the faith I will grant you that, I however know this to be false.

So which one was it? Verbatim or paraphrased? It was actually neither if you look at the other posters response which puts the entire quotes out there.

Christians make a huge storm when people put quotes from the bible and claim those who are putting them out there are out of context. They sit there all warm and fuzzy thinking 'ohyeah it sounds bad, but it's a good religion and must mean what I say it means not what it sounds like' yet some of you have no problem when someone literally butchers words to make it sound bad. That goes far beyond taking something out of context, yet somehow people are able to have it both ways here.

I'm sorry but you honestly have to be either completely closed minded or simply looking for a way to hate in order to take those words butchered as Gtech posted as the true word of the muslim religion, yet bitch and moan when someone posts something bad out of the bible as 'it's out of context'

This is not directed at you Mia, it's directed at several on here or anyone who does do this. They know who they are.

They are not quotes, they are butchered fractions. He also posted more than just them, calling their prophet a pedophile right before posting the so called quotes. Classic case of trying to enrage someones religion, to try to claim all he did was post some 'quotes' is simply out there. He knew full well what he was doing, he was baiting people plain and simple. Religion is not to be toyed with, look what the extreme Christians would respond with if quotes from the bible had been butchered like this right after they called Jesus a pedophile, or something of that nature.

It was not fact, it was nothing but crap. But that's to be expected from Gtech, that's about all he is capable of. If you honestly think it was a good post, I don't even know what to say to be honest. It was not even close to fact, it was not even close to a direct quote, it was butchered fragements and that's about it. It was an attack, made to draw people in, how people can not see that is beyond belief.

Incorrect, it is butchered fragments. What would you do if someone butchered and took bits and pieces from the bible? You do know it could be done...

 

I'd ask why they are still quoting the Old Testament..

 

Which is just as bad Mia as it's still in the bible, and the entire argument 'we dont' follow the old testament' is trully weak IMHO.

Yet people have no problem attacking the muslim faith no matter where the word was from, if the translation is correct, or hell if the person posting even butchers the transcript itself.

The old testament is still part of the holy book, if it was not then why is it even in there?

 

eek... I really do not want to go down this road with you. I'm having a difficult time understanding why you support some of this crap..

Anyway, no one is attacking the Muslim faith. Gtech simply pointed out what their own holy book says.. There is nothing in the "Bible" that even remotely compares to what was quoted in the "Koran".. Comparing two would be like holding "Mein Kempf" and "A Tale of Two Cities" on the same level.

Ultimately most Christians are quite aware of what is in the "Bible", conversely it would appear almost all of those who claim to be Muslim here have no idea what is in the "Koran", or do, and just deny it.

The Old Testament is part of the "Bible", but it is not something that is followed. There is no clear definition between old ways and new ways in the "Koran"... There is only one way.

My suggestion would be to read the Koran and pay particular attention to what they would say about your dog. Taken literally it is not a very nice religion...

 

I am only pointing out crap, Gtech did NOT quote directly. He called their prophet a pedophile, then used a muslim bashing site to post crap quotes that are not even close to 'quotes'

I have a bad habit if not liking false information, what Gtech posted is nothing but false crap. Yet some of you eat it up like it's chocolate pudding.

Personally I'd rather religion not even be discussed on here, however when some people make it a habit of attacking religion and don't stop there, they use crap for their information I will and do say something.

This is not supporting crap, I find it the same way that you support false information. I am not supporting Islam one bit BTW, I support using facts, not crap.

I find those who use false quotes such as this to attack the muslim faith just as dangerous as the terrorists themselves. You give them fuel to hate us, showing a total disrespect for their religion. Making it nothing more than a simple my religion is better than your religion mentality.

http://bible.cc/luke/19-27.htm

Last I heard this was not part of the 'old testament'

 

This is a parable.

This parable is not about the present day, not then nor now. It refers to the time of Christ's return on earth. It talks about how you are God's enemy when you fail, but that he loves you. It talks about how you are God's enemy when your will is set against him and you use your will purposely against him.

The parable is trying to illustrate that even though you may set your will against God, you still have time to repent before Christ's return.

You really need to read the entire passage to see what is being said. The words are not literal.

The difference between this parable (which the "Bible" even directly refers to this as, so people do not get confused) and the "Koran" is that the passages that Wade quoted, and Will later directly quoted with stanza and verse, ARE meant to be literal... They are not parables.

I'm glad you posted that particular passage... Many make the mistake you just did... Most do not know it is a parable..

 

What it is meant for or not is not the point, one side takes a verse from a religion they know literally nothing about and butcher it, refuse to take the explanation of those who follow the religion.

While all the time always coming up with an excuse/answer to the bads in the bible. You actually proved my point here.

Not to mention that you're using an english translation and in Gtechs case an extremely hacked version of the original.

How about to the point in this instance that we do not follow the old testament, you must admit that there is some bad stuff in there then. Yet who does use that version?

BTW there is some dispute if it's a parable or not

 

The point I proved is that one is a parable, the other is literal..

It was pretty literal.. The only hacked part was the addition of "Muslim", instead of Jew, Infidel, etc..

Those that seek to make the point that Christianity is evil.. Those that continually quote from it here..

Who's disputing it? The "Bible" refers to it as a parable.. What's to dispute?

 

VCTech debunked your claims of hate, where is your apology?

 

Ah, these were quotes from your Holy Book, and you did not even realize it..

BTW, can you tell me were I said that all Muslims should be whipped off the face of the earth.

Have not heard a peep out of you on the subject? Care to be man for once?

 

Does Islam give people the freedom to follow whatever religion and God s/he wants?
Does Islam permit a Muslim girl to marry a non-Muslim guy? If yes, then under what circumstances?

 

You can say that again. if it was literally any other member of this forum (with the exception of maybe Mia) then they would have been banned, probably for life, at least for a very very long time.

To say you have been lucky is a huge understatement.

You need to stay away from www.thereligionofpeace.com mate, which is a website for spreading hatred towards Islam to impressionable people with low IQ's.

 

Islam gives people the freedom to submit to the will of Muhammad.

That's why the supposed "libertarians" on DP love Islam -- because it removes all need for freedom.

 

As I said, they were LIES and not from our book. VTech DEBUNKED them. Move along now.....

 

That's already been done. Let's explore it again though. Here's a synopsis of your refutation. While three translations are offered at the source, and they all have the same "message/meaning," it appears the goal here is to simply choose a different translation than the original one quoted, for the mere sake of showing the words are different. This is a poor strategy, because it's not which "translation" is the most accurate, it's that they all have the same meaning, just using different words.

The problem with this strategy is, it backs up an assessment I'll offer later on (below) to illustrate the point.

Thank you for taking time to actually pull the text out of the passages. What it does is revalidates the point I was trying to make. When we replace the words "Infidel, Christian, Jew, Non-believer, Dis-believer") with the word "muslim" they suddenly become offensive.

I've removed your bolding that attempts to distract away from the meaning of the words I quoted and rebolded the part that confirms such.

In each of the translations:

008.055
YUSUFALI: For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: They will not believe.
PICKTHAL: Lo! the worst of beasts in Allah's sight are the ungrateful who will not believe.
SHAKIR: Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe.

...the message is the same, regardless of how it's worded. Those who dis-believe in Allah are beasts (animals) or animals. This is exactly the message I originally portrayed and I thank you for revalidating this point.

Let's review the summary on this one:

The original, turned around using "muslim" as the operative word: “Muslims are the vilest of animals…”

The actual scripture: Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve

Who are those that disbelieve? Non-muslims. Jews, Christians (specifically at the time, but atheists, and others as well).

The message: If you do not believe in islam, you are of the vilest of animals.

=============================================

Let's review this one. Your claim that not enough text existed to draw a conclusion. Quite the contrary though, because no matter how much you add before it, or after it, the message is still the same. Again, the strategy here is to quote an a different translation in an attempt to show the words are different, however, the message is the same.

Let's review the summary on this one:

The original, turned around using "muslim" as the operative word: “Show mercy to one another, but be ruthless to Muslims”

The actual scripture: Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves.

The message: Be merciful to fellow muslims, be ruthless to those who are not. Regardless of the words used or how much text is presented before or after, the "meaning" is still the same. It does not change.

So, let's mark this one off the list, as it is accurate as well.

=============================================

Let's review this one. Your claim this shows how far astray the Jews and Christians are from islam. A red herring in the form of "how did curse become fight" is offered here as a distractor, but let's review the summary and the actual message (as it is different than what you suggest):

The original, turned around using "muslim" as the operative word: How perverse are Muslims!”

The actual scripture: And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!

The message: Because Jews believe Ezra is the son of God and Christians believe the Messiah (Jesus) is the son of God, Christians and Jews are perverse. So there is no straying from the "message" in this one. In fact, it shows an intolerance towards other's beliefs. If someone does not agree with what the quran proposes, and has their own beliefs, then they are "perverse."

So, let's mark this one off the list, as it is accurate as well.

Additionally, I'd like to cover some more area on the topic of how Jews are treated in islam.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/005.qmt.html

Regardless of which translation you read, what is the message? Do not take Christians or Jews as friends. That's not a message of "tolerance." What if the Bible or other religious doctrines said "Do not take the muslims as friends?" Some might view that as a bit "racist" or "intolerant." The context is clear, the message is clear.

Let's explore a little more.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html#004.052.177

Well, that's kinda "nasty" isn't it? So at the end of times, muslims will get to heaven by killing a Jew? What sort of "tolerance" is that?

=============================================

Let's review this one. You claim "he" was addressing angels. This is not true. The "author" is reminding his followers of a message he claims to have given to the angels, because he feels it is also important to the reader. Therefore, he is addressing the reader (the muslim), not angels.

The original, turned around using "muslim" as the operative word: “Strike off the heads of Muslims, as well as their fingertips”

The actual scripture: I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them

The message: If you do not believe in islam, supposedly Allah will cast terror into the hearts of those who do not believe in islam, and the reader (the muslim) is to strike off their heads and every finger tip. Surely this couldn't have anything to do with all the beheadings is muslim countries.

So, let's mark this one off the list, as it is accurate as well.

=============================================

Apparently you didn't want to take issue with this one. It is pretty self-explanatory. Let's review:

The original, turned around using "muslim" as the operative word: Muslim mischief makers should be murdered or crucified”

The actual scripture: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement

The message: If you do not accept islam and attempt to cause mischief (teachings other than islam, going against islam, etc), the you deserve some choppage on your hands and feet. This may be why in muslim countries and (I believe sharia law) it is not uncommon to lose a hand. In fact, a number of Iraqis who were the subject of saddam's "hand chopping" were flown to the USA and given prosthetic hands by a group of doctors.

So, we can mark this one off the list too, as it is accurate.

I disagree. As I've refuted your claims, one by one, and show the actual context and the actual message to be quite true and as noted, directly from scripture. They stand, on their own merits. You cannot apologize for your religious teachings. They are what they are. Intolerant and as illustrated, completely within the context originally offered. I could go on. These are really some of the milder teachings in the quran.

Actually, I feel kinda good right now. It's very time consuming to refute when people introduce a lot of nonsense to cover up facts.

Actually, it is very synonymous with rape at certain ages. For example, take the most recent case I can recall, that of Casey Aldridge and Jamie Lynn Spears. Aldridge could face "statutory rape charges" because he is an adult, where Jamie is still consider a non-adult.

Granted, these are modern laws, however, I can absolutely guarantee you that if we saw this sort of headline on Drudge Report, most people would be thinking "pedophile:"

54 Year Old man Marries Six Year Old Girl

Times were different back then. It was common for young girls to marry at 12-15 years old and this practice was carried on (and probably still in some places) to this day. There is a huge difference between marrying a six year old girl and a 14 year old girl, not matter how far back in time you go.

==================================================

I said at the very beginning of this post that I would offer an illustration to bring to light a point:

For the record, my position on cauliflower is:

Surely the vilest of vegetables in the world are cauliflower

I am not alone in my displeasure with cauliflower. How perverse are the cauliflower!

I will cast terror into the hearts of cauliflower. Therefore strike off their stalks and strike off every florets of them so they may never grow again.

Fight those of the cauliflower lovers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness (but not on a cold night in San Francisco with ranch dressing near by )



Now, let me restate my position on cauliflower:

I despise cauliflower. Cauliflower is the vilest of vegetables. In a vegetable chopping contest, I would show no mercy to cauliflower. I would strike off the heads of cauliflower stalks. Cauliflower is perverse, it's a sick and twisted vegetable. I would fight any legislation to make cauliflower the national vegetable. I would fight anyone who tried to force me to eat cauliflower.


Summary:

My official doctrine/scripture on cauliflower is presented above. For further clarification, I've restated the official scriptures of my position on cauliflower in a different light. However, I believe the "message" regarding cauliflower is still the same.

Is it clear that I do not like cauliflower? Is there any question I will not eat cauliflower? Can anyone suggest by the comments above, that somehow, I may really like cauliflower, if I add some blue cheese dressing?

 

Copy pasting huh?

 

Thanks for the link. The latest news on religionofpeace is "A suicide attack kills former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and at least twenty supporters along a city street."

 

You fail to mention that Benazir killed her brother and sent Pakistan down the drain twice.