But that would be HARD.
It is a bit intellectually lazy to insist that ‘taking out of context’ inevitably means altering the meaning. It simply means ‘not supplying the surrounding sentences’. Whether this alters the meaning or implications of a sentence is a matter of debate, not assertion. For instance, consider just the first three quotations that scamartistry gave:
I admit, I have not looked up the context of these statements. It seems you would merely assert that I must, and that, were I to do so, some statements that (out of context) look truly disgusting would suddenly be transmuted? Into what, for Og’s sake?
“Oh it’s not so bad after all, I can see that ‘hell’ had been defined three sentences previously as ‘a bowl of kittens’, ‘smite’ is a quaint local expression for ‘massage’, and ‘slaughter’ is just one letter away from ‘laughter’. How disingenuous of scamartistry to omit this context!”
As my old English teacher said, don’t tell me, show me. Demonstrate the ‘context’ that renders these statements compatible with the sobriquet ‘religion of peace’.
I’m shocked, SHOCKED to learn that this is actually the topic you want to debate.
Verily, we are living through the Golden Age of Islamic Scholarship. When in the history of the world have there ever been so many experts on the contents and correct interpretation of the Qu’ran?
With one billion Muslims plus, obviously, not all are extremists or else we would have a bigger mess on our hands. How many there are, I do not know, but it is too damn many.
Some have zero sense of humor about their religion whatsoever. Geeze, draw a picture of Mohammad, and it is on!
At least the Bible is a book of peace. You know, with the stoning and the slavery… :dubious:
It’s their own fault for saying “Jehovah”.
Ow! Who threw that?
I always thought it was ‘Islam, the religion of peas’. Or, alternatively, perhaps it’s ‘Islam, the religion of piece’…
Translation errors…what can you do?
-XT
That would be chick peas, just to be clear.
It doesn’t flow as well…Islam is the religion of chick peas. Just doesn’t have the same ring to it…
-XT
I have a hard time taking this thread seriously, because it doesn’t simultaneoulsy advocate abolishing the Bible. If the Koran is bad, surely the Bible is equally so. That one is focused on to the exclusion of the other causes me to doubt that the arguer is disclosing all the premises they are reaching their conclusions from.
Well, they aren’t analogous. After all, Christianity is the religion of glove, while Islam is the religion of peas. You can see the difference, surly??
-XT
No one is arguing for abolishing the Koran.
I know a few muslims. They are well aware that I do not subscribe to their religious beliefs.
Why am I not dead?
So those “Visualize Whirled Peas” bumper stickers are correct, Islam plans to take over the whorl. 
I’m not sure what your topic is. Islam isn’t really a subject for debate. Your initial question was answered. What do you looking for here? Do you want to debate the meaning or implications of the verses you quoted upthread, or perhaps the Harris quote? If you don’t have anything specific to offer this may be more of a Pit thread.
Give it time. It’s like the Dim Mak from The Men Who Stare at Goats…
Exactly! Bastards want to take over the whirl! They want to swirl Islam (via the board) across the entire whirl, and we just sit back and watch…
-XT
Islam is founded much more on military conquest than most other religions. The founder of Islam conquered cities and set himself up as a military leader. The founder of Christianity was killed by the military authorities.
Christianity later was incorporated into the existing political structure (the Roman empire) several hundred years after its beginning. Islam was part of the political structure right from the start.
I don’t think it is exactly false to say that Islam is a religion of peace, but the elements that can be interpreted to lead to violence are much more central to the message than they are in, say, Buddhism.
The first person I ever heard characterize Islam as a “peaceful religion” was George Bush. It was in the context of post-911. I understand why he said it, and what he was trying to get at, but I also understand why many folks would find it hard to believe.
I am reading thru the Quran, and am about three quarters of the way thru. And this -
is pretty accurate.
Regards,
Shodan
It occurs to me that pretty much every time I’ve heard islam referred to as “the religion of peace” it has been in a sarcastic tone and usually followed by something like “my ass”. While I’m sure one can scare up examples of people saying it unironically as well, it’s starting to feel more like the old “obama the messiah” meme and others that people like to trot out for easy targets to argue against.
On review, I suppose you’re right.
But still this thread seems to be based upon throwing stones at the glass house of Islam’s (imagined?) claim of being a “turn the other cheek” religion. Which makes one want to check where the stones are being thrown from - when someone throws stones from inside their own glass house, there tends to be collateral damage.