Prophet Muhammad vs Jesus Christ

Post Reply New Topic

That doesn't mean it never did. Christianity went through a slow, drawn-out process of living up to its rhetoric as a belief system built on acceptance and humility. Islam is currently going through a similar process. It brings the same kind of inspiration to Muslims in the West as Christianity brings to us. Attacking Muhammad and Islam as a whole delays this system, since it creates the wrong dichotomy; Islam vs. Christianity instead of freedom vs. oppression.

A big part of that has to do with the period Christianity was at it's worst, which had been the Dark Ages of the western world, a time of ignorance, superstition, and warlords. The Islamic world is going through it's own Dark Age these days.

I agree, so it will in time overcome it and the Islamic theocracies will fall, but the positive aspects of Islam will remain, as happened with our religion

I agree, I have Muslim friends from Middle Eastern countries who are fighting for this one by one as we speak, just as hard core loving Christians have done here in the United States, in the historical past.

Albeit, it is mostly the females who are doing it, but that is no surprise either, as females lead the battle here, as well, last century.

GIRL POWER IS AN INCREDIBLE FORCE, WHEN UTILIZED THIS WAY.

PERHAPS MORE POWERFUL THAN AN ATOMIC BOMB, before all IS said AND done! :)

AND THE REASON IS, AS THROUGH ALL HUMAN HISTORY, CHANGE STARTS AT THE HEART more than reason alone, when ALL is SAID and DONE!

I haven't seen any positive aspects yet.

Well, have you talked to any of the Muslims in your life about it?

I just wanted to say that my current pet theory is that Jesus and Muhammad are actually aliens that had something of the equivalent to an extended stag party on earth and ended up on some moon several decades later drunkenly going 'dude, dude you'll never guess what I did' and 'no no no DUDE, you'll never guess what I did'. Also, I would dearly interested in anyone who wants to make a short film on this.

That said, at its core, Islam is very similar to Christianity, which is very similar to Judaism. Very broadly, all the argument is over is who gets to speak for whose version of god. So saying there is nothing good about Islam is saying there is nothing good about Christianity is saying etc. etc. etc. As someone else mentioned the radicalization of Islam is a relatively normal pattern for a religion to follow (at least one that will stick around) and it is only following Christianity own version by a few centuries. Those who give Islam a bad name are a fairly small if powerful and vocal minority, just as the biblical literalists and tea partiers are considered far too rightwing by many centrists and giving Christianity a bad name as well.

Why is it always about these two prophets? We always forget John the Baptist, and his religion.

We can't forget Zarathustra.

Dear me! Where are the 'Spergics?

Is everyone so smug in their sentimental political correctness that they don't tolerate any reasonable investigation of the issue?

I suggest that blind acceptance of the most current sentimental and subjective fads is not a good way to gain a reasonable understanding... or to really know what you're talking about.

It's more than a bit disappointing to discover that there don't seem to be any razor-sharp, knowledgeable, hair-splitting discussions to be found on supposedly AS sites. Perhaps most super-focused Autistic types are engaged in their obsessions and not much interested in being bombarded with silly platitudes that can be easily accessed by simply turning on a television.

Reasonable investigation? Is that your token scientific offering?

Well, I suppose it is. Without investigation and reason "science" is merely a fad opinion or ideological sales-pitch.

So you believe in investigation and reason?

Orright. I see where you're going. You're going to try to trap me in some circular reasoning argument where your premise justifies the process and the process "proves" your premise... and anything to the contrary is not withstanding.

Anyway, as far as this argument goes, if you don't know what Muhammadanism is or means you need to do some homework.

Regarding the link you posted (from Catholic Apologetics) and some of your rhetoric about Islam, you might be surprised that to some degree, I agree with you.

But that's not what I'm curious about. You spoke about 'reasonable investigation,' and about 'investigation and reason,' so I'm trying to understand your approach to science. Sometimes you seem to respect science and other times not. Is it the method?

You are clever, and I bet you graduated from the informal Alinskyite school of social reformers with flying colours.

I don't just "respect" science... I love it! What was known as "scientific method" no longer exists in the "science" presented to schoolchildren and public.

As I've said before; with science you must start with what you know for certain; and anything that doesn't agree with that must be wrong somehow.

If you are willing to continue this disagreement we must determine what we can know for certain.

What if the experience of a man (or indeed woman) of science is substantial enough? Can he or she make some assumptions based on that experience, in the process of his/her thesis and then call the result valid?