The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant Megathread

[Malthus]

A religion is more than just its holy books. It is also composed of a bunch of traditions that have evolved over time.

That is why, for example, "Anabaptists" could be murderous millenialists in 16th century Munster, and peaceful pacifists in the 21st century, without changing which holy books they used. See also the Aga Khan and his Ismailis, in medieval times known as the "Assassins".

[The Brain]

Chaka.

[Valmy]

Amalekites.
God condemns Saul for leaving the cattle alive.  But Saul was obedient enough to slaughter all the woman and children, as commanded.

He also left the king alive that non-genocidal monster.

[Valmy]

Are we defining bible as NT only?

First you are only supposed to symbolically kill them.  Secondly those are only for Jew on Jew symbolic killings.

[garbon]

Are we defining bible as NT only?

First you are only supposed to symbolically kill them.  Secondly those are only for Jew on Jew symbolic killings.

Too trippy for my blood.

[CountDeMoney]

"Jew on Jew symbolic killings?"  What's that, talking about somebody behind his back until he drops dead?

[Viking]

I am not sure I fully agree with Viking - I want to, but similar passages can also be found in the Bible - and I am not a sufficiently expert theologian to say if there is a difference between the two books in this respect. Plus there are even in Christianity those, called dominationists, (fortunately most of them are fringe and scarce loons) who say the law should be based on the Mosaic law. Same goes for Judaism adherents.

So my question is - is the difference between Islamists on one hand and dominationist Christians and ultra-Orthodox Jews really qualitative or is it purely quantitative (i.e. with sufficient numbers of the dominationist Christians for example we could have a Christian version of ISIS the kind Malthus's aunt wrote about)?

The issue here is first of all the distinct lack of christians and jews murdering people for eating shell-fish or wearing cotton-polyester shirts.

The second is that Christianity (along with Rabbinical Judaism) is not a religion of laws, it is a religion of morals. In effect the entire point of these two religions is how to not follow the law, either because you like bacon or because the romans burned the temple.

The theology matters here because the Islamic commands to murder and enslave universal by their nature. You need substantially more theological acrobatics to ignore them than say the instruction to slay the caananites or whatever. The koran gives the instruction to all muslims in perpituty to a general class of people, the old testament reports of how god told a profet to do evil scumbaggy things to defenseless children etc.

[Viking]

Robert Spencer doesn't seem like the kind of person that anyone should ever be listening to.

Director of Jihad Watch? Ah, cool - I bet you have an unbiased view of Islam.

Ad Hom much?

[garbon]

The theology matters here because the Islamic commands to murder and enslave universal by their nature. You need substantially more theological acrobatics to ignore them than say the instruction to slay the caananites or whatever.

I doubt most muslims are murders and/or slavers.

[garbon]

Robert Spencer doesn't seem like the kind of person that anyone should ever be listening to.

Director of Jihad Watch? Ah, cool - I bet you have an unbiased view of Islam.

Ad Hom much?

It goes to credibility of the source on this very topic. Of course, he'll choose to interpret certain passages in the ways that he wants and play them up as more important than other passages that don't agree with his views.

[Valmy]

"Jew on Jew symbolic killings?"  What's that, talking about somebody behind his back until he drops dead?

'You are dead to me!  I am thinking about stoning you'

[Viking]

The theology matters here because the Islamic commands to murder and enslave universal by their nature. You need substantially more theological acrobatics to ignore them than say the instruction to slay the caananites or whatever.

I doubt most muslims are murders and/or slavers.

Thankfully most of them are reasonable enough to ignore most of their book. The problem lies with those who take the book seriously.

[Viking]

Robert Spencer doesn't seem like the kind of person that anyone should ever be listening to.

Director of Jihad Watch? Ah, cool - I bet you have an unbiased view of Islam.

Ad Hom much?

It goes to credibility of the source on this very topic. Of course, he'll choose to interpret certain passages in the ways that he wants and play them up as more important than other passages that don't agree with his views.

Again, is he wrong?

[garbon]

Robert Spencer doesn't seem like the kind of person that anyone should ever be listening to.

Director of Jihad Watch? Ah, cool - I bet you have an unbiased view of Islam.

Ad Hom much?

It goes to credibility of the source on this very topic. Of course, he'll choose to interpret certain passages in the ways that he wants and play them up as more important than other passages that don't agree with his views.

Again, is he wrong?

Yeah, I think he is.

[Viking]

I am not sure I fully agree with Viking - I want to, but similar passages can also be found in the Bible - and I am not a sufficiently expert theologian to say if there is a difference between the two books in this respect. Plus there are even in Christianity those, called dominationists, (fortunately most of them are fringe and scarce loons) who say the law should be based on the Mosaic law. Same goes for Judaism adherents.

So my question is - is the difference between Islamists on one hand and dominationist Christians and ultra-Orthodox Jews really qualitative or is it purely quantitative (i.e. with sufficient numbers of the dominationist Christians for example we could have a Christian version of ISIS the kind Malthus's aunt wrote about)?

Thereis no quote in the Bible that ever suggests non-believers should be killed.

That is an idiotic argument BB, especially since it is 100% untrue.

13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.