Tuesday: Extremely silly comparisons. Not even CLOSE to being the scope of religion. Try again. Or really, don't bother.

Tuesday: Who are YOU to say what my reasons are? You use your reasons for being part of a cult, I'll use mine for not being part of one. Unlike some, I don't care what anyone thinks of my reasons for being part or not part of something, so I have no reason to lie.

Accept it or not.

Tuesday: I have no clue why you feel the need to go round n round in circles. I stated what I felt, and beyond that, it doesn't (shouldn't?) matter to you. Move on, thank you. YOU are the one who felt the odd craving to call me a liar.

Tuesday: Disagreeing? How is calling me a liar, disagreeing? Disagreeing with MY personal reasons? It's not even close to the same thing as challenging someone about facts. Silly. Try a flame fellowship for that. Thanks. Back on topic, please. Thanks.

Tuesday: "Silly to use other people's actions as an excuse for not being a part of something. Just be honest for your reasons."

Tuesday: Because YOU say so? Sorry, I don't turn to you to determine my various reasons for my views. Again, move on.

rod03801: Religion is just one of the oldest forms of being able to excuse being a crap human. Modern versions include, race, money, political affiliation, sex, married status, sexuality, class, atheism, physical appearance, etc, etc, etc....

Artful Dodger:

> Show me where as a global effort, Christians are at war with the world in the way that Islam is.

Just because al Qaeda wants westerners out of the Middle East it does not mean that Islam is at war with the world. I think that you have been repeating right wing propaganda for so long that you have actually have grown to believe it.

But then, we forget that it was Western empires that invaded the Middle East, rahter than the other way around. How many times did Iran deposed an American president and imposed a dictatorship in the USA? Yet Americans did it to Iran. How many times did countires in the Middle East gave money and weapons to dictators in the USA? Yet the USA did it in several countries, not only in the Middle East but around the world. Is it a surprise then that those people see our western way of life as undesirable?

One could very well argue that the USA is at war with the world. After all, your armed forces are present everywhere, invading other countries and threatening to overthrow goverments and bomb those people who disagree with your perceived self-superior way of life. But then, empires always blame those they invade. The Romans invaded the barbarians, even though it was the Romans who invaded those around them.

Irrespective of whether Isalam is at war with the world, you still haven't answered my questions:

How do you account for the wars of Reformation and Christians killing Christians?

How do you accounjt for Christians killing millions of natives in the Americas just to impose their empires and religion on them?

Artful Dodger:

> Islam itself claims to be a religion that will spread by the sword.

And Christianity is without flaw, never using violence to spread itself around the world?

I suppose there never were war among Christians, and Christians never used violence to achieve their objectives. The fighting in northern Ireland had nothing to do with Christianity. When Europeans burned alive Aztec and Mayan kings and priests it had nothing to do with Christianity. Christianity is all love and purity, incapable of cruelty, greed or destruction.

But then, you still didn't answer my questions. I suppose you have no argument to defend Christianity. Islam is bad, Christianity is good. Historical reality is immaterial.

Artful Dodger: Are you talking about all those posts you deleted? If so.. how can any one find them if you (as told) deleted them so others couldn't see your mean side?

Übergeek 바둑이: Just take it as he has no argument.

As obviously he doesn't and cannot if he was playing on a level field. At the moment all he's doing is twisting and changing the conditions of proof to avoid answering.

Artful Dodger: So.. that means your previous excuses that torture is justified has now been blown away by your own words.

How do you think Jesus would react to Christians saying torture is ok?

Glenn Beck on web tv.. yet another web channel

Abu al-Qasim Khalaf ibn al-Abbas Al-Zahrawi (936–1013), (Arabic: أبو القاسم بن خلف بن العباس الزهراوي‎) also known in the West as Abulcasis, was an Andalusian Arab physician. He is considered the greatest medieval surgeon to have appeared from the Islamic World, and has been described by some as the father of modern surgery.[1] His comprehensive medical texts shaped both Islamic and European surgical procedures up until the Renaissance. His greatest contribution to history is the Kitab al-Tasrif, a thirty-volume encyclopedia of medical practices.[2]

Not always properly credited, Abū Al-Qāsim's al-Tasrif described both what would later became known as "Kocher's method" for treating a dislocated shoulder and "Walcher position" in obstetrics. Al-Tasrif described how to ligature blood vessels almost 600 years before Ambroise Paré, and was the first recorded book to document several dental devices and explain the hereditary nature of haemophilia.[citation needed] He was also the first to describe a surgical procedure for ligating the temporal artery for migraine, also almost 600 years before Pare recorded that he had ligated his own temporal artery for headache that conforms to current descriptions of migraine.[citation needed] Abū al-Qāsim was therefore the first to describe the migraine surgery procedure that is enjoying a revival in the 21st century, spearheaded by Elliot Shevel a South African surgeon.

Abū al-Qāsim also described the use of forceps in vaginal deliveries.[3] He introduced over 200 surgical instruments.[4] Many of these instruments were never used before by any previous surgeons. Hamidan, for example, listed at least twenty six innovative surgical instruments that Abulcasis introduced.[citation needed]

His use of catgut for internal stitching is still practised in modern surgery. The catgut appears to be the only natural substance capable of dissolving and is acceptable by the body. Abū al-Qāsim also invented the forceps for extracting a dead fetus, as illustrated in the Al-Tasrif.[5]

In the 14th century, the French surgeon Guy de Chauliac quoted al-Tasrif over 200 times. Pietro Argallata (d. 1453) described Abū al-Qāsim as "without doubt the chief of all surgeons". Abū al-Qāsim's influence continued for at least five centuries, extending into the Renaissance, evidenced by al-Tasrif's frequent reference by French surgeon Jacques Delechamps (1513–1588).[citation needed]

The street in Córdoba where he lived is named in his honor as "Calle Albucasis". On this street he lived in house no. 6, which is preserved today by the Spanish Tourist Board with a bronze plaque (awarded in January 1977) which reads: "This was the house where lived Abul-Qasim."[citation needed]

Artful Dodger: Some people in AMERICA still think that NASA faked it. Some people still think Elvis is alive and living with aliens.. or is an alien.

Some people still think that God is going to end the world .. physically. Some people just like to live in fear

Artful Dodger: some people ALL OVER THE WORLD still think that NASA faked it. Area 51 comes to mind.

a woman in Queens NY left $250,000 in her will to the Doomsday Prophet

Artful Dodger: the Arab world stands near the bottom of every measure of human development. You are correct.. they are most definitely just about sub human. Something must be done...a Final Solution for these Semitic savages..what would you propose...mein Herr? Also we must find a way to free Ratko Mladic, surely he was only doing God's will.

Artful Dodger: Surely we can find a way to wipe off the earth about a billion people or so....Thats what The Lord would want

For those who aren't sure... these posts today are sarcasm

Artful Dodger:

> Jesus:
"Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."
(Matthew 5:14)

Fine, but then, was that why it was OK for Christians to burn at the stake Aztec and Mayan priests?

Or more recently, is that why it was OK for American Christians to support and condone the wars that the US is involved in?

Is that why many christiansbelieve it is OK to use nuclear weapons as a deterrent?

Is that why Sarah Palin (self-described good Christian) believes in it is OK to be in the NRA and it is ok for people to own guns?

Is that why as a good Christian you were defending the psychological torture known as waterboarding?

There is no doubt that the Qur’an has a number of belligerent verses, like 8:12, for example. Yet, as I have explained in the past, these verses have a context. Once the context is understood, the verses are clearly understood. Yet, before I go into verse 8:12, I must explain a bit about the process of revelation of the Qur’an. The Qur’an was not revealed all at once in toto. Rather, it was gradually sent down over a period of 23 years. During that period, the community of believers evolved and specific situations came up, to which the Qur’anic text frequently responded. That is why the Qur’an seems to be fragmented if one reads the book from cover to cover. The Qur’an, in fact, mentions this gradual process:

“God - there is no deity save Him, the Ever-Living, the Self-Subsistent Fount of All Being! Step by step has He bestowed upon thee [O Muhammad] from on high this divine writ, setting forth the truth which confirms whatever there still remains (of earlier revelations): for it is He who has bestowed from on high the Torah and the Gospel” (3:2-3).

This is important to understand when reading verse 8:12. This verse - along with several ahead of it - was revealed in reference to the Battle of Badr, the first major battle between the Muslims and the Meccan pagans around 625 C.E. A little background is in order.

After the Prophet (pbuh) and his followers were expelled from Mecca and migrated to Yathrib (now known as Medina), a city 300 miles to the north, the Meccans seized all the property of the Muslims that was left in Mecca. This was an act of open war. When the Prophet learned that a large caravan of the Meccans was coming from Syria near Medina, he intended to attack it. Abu Sufyan, who was leading the caravan, learned of this planned attack and sent word to Mecca for protection. His fellow Meccans sent an army, and they met in battle at Badr. The Muslims handily defeated the Meccans, killing almost all of the most important leaders of Mecca.

Now, verse 8:12 comes into clearer focus. The verse speaks about what God told the angels to say to the believers, in order to inspire them before the battle. The Muslims were very fearful, especially since the Meccans were thrice their number, battle hardened, and much better equipped. This becomes even clearer when the verse is read in context:

[9]: Lo! You were praying unto your Sustainer for aid, whereupon He thus responded to you: “I shall, verily, aid you with a thousand angels following one upon another!”

[10]: And God ordained this only as a glad tiding, and that your hearts should thereby be set at rest - since no succour can come from any save God: verily, God is almighty, wise!

[11]: [Remember how it was] when He caused inner calm to enfold you, as an assurance from Him, and sent down upon you water from the skies, so that He might purify you thereby and free you from Satan’s unclean whisperings and strengthen your hearts and thus make firm your steps.

[12]: Lo! Thy Sustainer inspired the angels [to convey this His message to the believers]: “I am with you! [And He commanded the angels:] “And give firmness unto those who have attained to faith (with these words from Me:) ‘I shall cast terror into the hearts of those who are bent on denying the truth; strike, then, their necks, and strike off every one of their finger-tips.’” [emphasis added]

See? The verse is clearly speaking about the events surrounding the Battle of Badr. It is not a general command to “strike at the necks of the infidels.” Anyone with an understanding of the history of Islam knows this. When I read these verses, I know that they refer to the Battle of Badr. No where in my mind is there even an inkling of a thought to “strike at the necks of the infidels.”

This reminds me of another verse which is frequently cited by critics of Islam as proof of the Qur’an’ s exhortation to kill those who are not Muslim. In fact, some of these critics even claim that this verse is the scriptural basis for the brutal and inhuman practice of beheading now common in Iraq and Afghanistan:

“smite their (the infidels) necks until you overcome them fully, and then tighten their bonds” (47:4)

This could not be farther from the truth. Now, I purposely quoted only part of the verse out of context to show how misleading this tactic is. The full verse reads:

“Now when you meet [in war] those who are bent on denying the truth (commonly translated as “the infidels”) smite their necks until you overcome them fully, and then tighten their bonds; but thereafter [set them free] either by an act of grace or against ransom, so that the burden of war may be lifted: thus [shall it be]. And [know that] had God so willed, He could indeed punish them [Himself]; but [He wills you to struggle] so as to test you [all] by means of one another. And as for those who are slain in God’s cause, never will He let their deeds go to waste.” (47:4)

This verse, like 8:12, is speaking about the believers’ conduct in an open battle against the enemy. God is “psyching up” the believers before a battle, just like American soldiers psych themselves up before they go into combat. It is not an open call to behead all infidels. Once again, when the verse is understood in its context, this becomes obviously clear.

In fact, the verse actually is one of mercy toward the enemy. After the battle is over, during which the believers are to “smite their necks,” the verse directs the believers to set free those who are captured by the Muslims, either “by an act of grace or against ransom.” These captives are avowed enemies, who would have killed the believers if they had the chance. Despite this, however, the verse directs the Muslims to set them free. How, in God’s Most Holy Name, can this verse be one of terror?