.
your subsequent question, whether I think God is unjustifiably intolerant is something I can't answer directly, firstly because the justifiability of intolerance is inherently relative and subjective to the follower (evidenced by the way that some Christians think intolerance is unjustifiable, while others do not), and secondly because I'm not Christian.
I agree that the justification of intolerance is relative and subjective to the individual.
This is evidenced also by the intolerance of the political Left who are always the most outspoken in accusing opponents of being intolerant.
There is a difference, massively, between believing that Jesus is the only path to God, and killing, maiming, hurting, ousting, excluding or hating people who don't agree with you on that matter.
And a reading of the Bible confirms how no killing, maiming, hurting or hating people people is endorsed.
But the Quran however, says fighting and subduing non-Mulsims is commanded.
Consider Sura 9:29 which, being one of Muhammad's later injunctions, abrogates his earlier peaceful ones.
. Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
I think the planet could do without various groups of people hating or killing each other over their doctrines; Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist or Muslim. Don't you?
I agree that we do not want people hating and killing each other. Hence why this debate about Islam as the worst perpetrators of hate and killing comes from Muslims referring to directives from the Quran.
Are you saying they should be more extreme in their intolerance, then?
That's quite a leap.
My point, which you seem to have avoided, is that most religious followers do not understand their religion. They're merely just cultural followers who are not that interested in truly understanding the teachings of the religion they follow. That is why most Muslims do not follow the violent commands from the Quran.
But in all religions there are also those who do take their religion seriously and study it's teachings. Hence why we see these genuine Muslims behind all the terrorism today.
So more Muslims should be more intolerant and aggressive, then? I'd think the fact that many Muslims are peaceful is a good thing, wouldn't you? I also think it's quite arrogant to assume you know the Quran better than the vast majority of Muslims who are in contact with it day in day out, and don't go around killing people.
I would prefer that all Muslims were just cultural Muslims, not taking the Quran seriously enough to obey it's commands for jihad, FGM, treating women as second class citizens, etc, etc.
But again I'll remind you that in ALL religions the majority of people are merely cultural followers being mostly ignorant of their religion's teachings. In addition to this, Islam expects that the Quran should be recited in Arabic, which even further limits the understanding of Muslims as most of them do not understand Arabic. Your typical moderate, peaceful Muslim would know about as much about the Quran as your typical moderate, peaceful Catholic would know about the Bible (that is very little).
Actually, it does.
Deuteronomy 17
If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
As I told you before, Israel was under the law
seeking to establish it's own righteousness and not willing to submit to God's righteousness, Rom 10:3. Israel was an example to the world. Plus the law was a tutor to bring mankind to Christ, to show us that we needed a savior, Gal 3:24,.
But as you are not a Christian you will probably not understand this.
In the New Testament we see that Christ is the END of the law, for righteousness, Rom 10:4.
So we see the Bible does not endorse the killing of any unbelievers in this physical life.
God loves the world so much that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes on him will have eternal life, John 3:16.
But as in many religions, there are consequences for choosing the wrong path. In Christianity it's
spiritual consequences for those who choose to reject God's grace.
Islam, however, speaks of fighting infidels now, in this physical life.
It seems to me that in order to fix the problem, you have to recognize the majority of Muslims who aren't extremist, and realize that the people who are, are not the norm of Islam, they are the exception. The normal Muslim, thus, cannot be lumped in the same group. Just like extremists Christians are a minority of Christianity, the same goes for extremist Muslims and Islam. Once you can correctly identify those who need to be stopped, instead of grouping them together with those who would see an end to extremism (moderate Muslims) then you can actually look at stopping the people who are the problem. Generalizations and ignorant stereotyping serve nobody, going forward. The reason for looking at history is to understand that blatant attacks on whole faith groups evidently portray you without a commanding sense of logic, and people aren't stupid, they'll backlash against you.
You still seem to be missing what I say. Again I'll say that the majority of Muslims are moderate and peaceful. These are the cultural Muslims who do not understand much of the Quran.
And again I'll say that it's not Muslims we are attacking when we call for debate about the violent directives in the Quran.
You seem not able to separate these 2.
BTW, just as the majority of Germans were moderate and peaceful before WW2, remember that it was the minority (Nazi's) who brought Germany under Hitler. The peaceful, moderate majority of Germans were irrelevant with the Nazi minority calling the shots.
We could possibly see the same with Islam, where the peaceful, moderate majority are irrelevant when the minority extremist Muslims are calling the shots.
And again, there are no blatant attacks against Muslims. It's the violent directives in the Quran that are the issue.
BTW, as you are a leftist can I just say that the Left's unfounded, blatant attacks on political opponents
"evidently portray you without a commanding sense of logic, and people aren't stupid, they'll backlash against you"
If you want to tackle extremism, why focus solely on Muslims?
I think most here would be quite surprised that such a question would even be asked.
But, to state the obvious, Muslims, acting on the directives from the Quran, are the main threat to the safety of Muslims and non-Muslims alike. No other religion comes anywhere near to these Muslims. These Muslims are even trying to take over whole countries to form a Caliphate. And should that occur then the Quran says that they can call for an offensive jihad.
That's exactly what you incite, perhaps inadvertently, by aggressively asserting all followers of Islam need converted, with the inflection that they are somehow sub-par barbaric human beings for being Muslim. Dehumanization and degradation are subtle, but dangerous.
Actually nobody I know has been suggesting that Muslims are sub-human.
It's interesting that you should use such rhetoric about the "
Dehumanization and degradation" of opponents being dangerous. I say this as the Left of politics is well known for demonizing its' opponents as a tactic to stop debate.
Give me one instance in the entirety of human history where a mass conversion under the grounds ''Your religion is evil and you are all stupid and deceived for following it'' has worked. Likewise, give me one single instance in history where bombing more of a demographic has quelled any hatred amongst them and their descendants.
You can't.
Your extreme examples will not work.
But a public debate (without all the Muslim apologists interfering) calling on moderate, peaceful Muslims to make a stand against the extremist Muslim clerics, etc, so that the violent directives in the Quran are rejected or reinterpreted so that such extremism will no longer be promoted in mosques, now that would be a good start.
Interestingly, here in Australia the government introduced anti-terror laws, which the Islamic clerics have opposed because it limits their freedom of speech regarding verses in the Quran commanding violence.
I would have thought that if these violent verses in the Quran did not mean actual violence, then they would have no need to object.
You genuinely can't see the distinction between extremist Muslim and ordinary Muslim, can you? How many innocent Muslims have been killed by the very extremists we're talking about? Yet you think the distinction is irrelevant. The vast majority of Muslims DO NOT KILL PEOPLE. HOw do you then, come to the conclusion that Islam is a religion of violence? The clear reality proves otherwise; it is overwhelmingly a religion of nonviolence; the violent are the minority.
Again, you are not listening. I suggest you read my posts again.
The plight of people who are victims of that minority should be shown up, and it should be regarded as important, and something that needs addressed, but not at the expense of the vast majority of Muslims who oppose it just as we do. When you have hundreds of millions of Muslims saying 'we don't want this', how can you possibly assert that Islam itself is the problem?
Again, I'll say that the majority of moderate, peaceful Muslims are merely cultural Muslims who do not know much about the Quran. They are just as irrelevant as the majority of moderate peaceful Germans leading up to WW2. It's the extremists such as the Nazi's in WW2 and the genuine fundamentalist Muslims, who take their belief system seriously enough to take it too far.
And there is no doubt the Quran gives the authority for violent jihad for those Muslims who take Islam seriously.
