You are new to this thread, I think, mostly I am done talking about topics that have been covered and covered over and over again.
The idea is what specifically about the book caused specific actions on parts of the believers. In other words, where did Jesus say… kill your enemy is so and so fashion for so and so reason.
Where?
a·pol·o·gist
əˈpäləjəst/
noun
a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial.
Religion is just a part of the culture, the culture would still be violent if they were Christian or Jewish or Buddhist.
Maybe I’m just naïve, but to me it seems the middle east is jealous of all the civil liberties we have here.
I’m sorry, I meant to say the middle east is angry of all the civil liberties our women have here.
A distinction without a difference. Your arguments are sounding more and more desperate.
This is an interesting point- why did Stalin kill so many of his own, yet Hitler would often simply retire his staff or administration rather than execute them.
The communists were keen on the idea that all are equal, but the nazis had an ideology of genetic superiority.
Maybe this means that Stalin saw people as disposable - as only social conditions prevent someone from rising in a hierarchy then you can replace people from below, but Hitler retained the idea of people having innate talent that makes them progress in society - hence people are not so disposable (unless you are deemed genetically unworthy).
A kind of extreme nurture/nature contrast ?
“For five thousand years, king of the gods, as long as the sun and the moon exist in this universe, you who will become a Buddha, protect the Śāsana of our Lord Buddha.”
I asked for specific actions endorsed by Buddha. I can only assume that you found none that were violent.
I don’t know, it’s an interesting question but I am growing rather sleepy and can’t come up with a good response.
“Protect the Śāsana”
And of course Jesus’ various rants against money, his imagery of a stingy rich man cooking in Hell…
This sort of foundational scripture is pretty much why American Christian society and culture is like it is. The disdain for wealth, innocent of greed and avarice. Yeah, that would be us all right.
I have made no claim that you are stupid. I have noted that your hatred is supported by your decision to refuse education.
If you simply laid out the idea that people could use scriptures for evil purposes, I would agree with you. What you have done, instead, is to seize several selected passages, (translated and misinterpreted outside historical context by people with their own agenda), and used that poor information to support a negative bias that you had before you chose to accept their odd presentations. From there, you moved to condemn an entire religion, dismissing every legitimate evidence against your narrow view.
You began this thread with an OP that was misleading and that engaged in the fallacy of the excluded middle. When I pointed out the errors in the OP, you moved the goalposts so far that you changed the entire game, then chastised me for not playing by your new rules. You claim I am a “funny bird” for not joining you in hysterics over something you have chosen to misunderstand. That is not my problem.
I do not chastise you for being opposed to Islam. I chastise you for wallowing in ignorance and appearing to prefer it to information, facts, and logic.
We are supposed to be fighting ignorance, and you are proselytizing for it.
Not commenting on that… that is resurrecting points that we have gone over and over. I’m not really commenting on that either.
I’m going to sleep. I ordered this book, The Lives of Muhammad by Kecia Ali. After I get through the first chapter or first 3 chapters I’ll maybe make a post about it. I’d be quite willing (very much so) to keep that thread to historical discussion and avoid criticism and controversy.
In other words I did enjoy chatting with you. Thanks for talking with me and not getting mad at me or insulting me. I can tell that you do know a lot about the history of Islam/Muhammad, so perhaps we can talk about that in a future thread.
That is not what is being contested. The point at hand is can a religious text/religion make people worse than they would be without adherence to the text. I will repeat my comments from before to see if you agree or disagree. I am about to go to sleep so most likely I will look for your response tomorrow, should you choose to answer. If possible, I don’t know if it would be possible for you, but, if possible, you could respond without doing either of the following:
1- Giving me another patronizing lecture
2- Somehow changing the subject
In other words, see if you can respond directly to the point that I am making. (The point is that religion (can) make bad people worse).
A’isha, thank you for ridding me of some ignorance.
I hope you enjoy the book, and I’m happy to talk with you about Islam any time! 
That’s all I want to do.
and?
You’re doing this act on purpose, right? There is no text whatsoever–and never has been–that can cause a person to act one way or the other.
And if Muslim violence results in 8,000 deaths per year, it’s a pretty sorry also-ran when compared to the deaths resulting from Christian violence.
religion has no influence on people?