Pakistan mob kills Christian couple over 'blasphemy'

[German Viking]

Its worth noting that the 'prophets' on which the 3 major monotheististic religions are based ie Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed, would probably be horrified at what their ' adherents' have done with their ideas.

Buddha in particular was anti-dogma and anti-religion. I have always liked the famous Zen Buddhist saying 'if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him', which captures the spirit nicely.

A more prosaic quote from John Lennon sums it up (I paraphrase) - 'Jesus was alright, but its his disciples twisting things that ruin it for me'.

A mob like the one that bashed these people to death are about as far from Mohammeds message as you can get.

I regret I do not agree. The highest ideal of any living muslim is to emulate their prophet. Indeed, much of their lives are spent studying how the prophet executed his life, and others. Thus the problem: the "adherents" are actually emulating the life of the prophet. If you can show me where this is incorrect I stand corrected.

Mohammed probably would not have have aimlessly killed other people of the book because they were christians but if charged with desecrating the koran or Islamic blasphemy (a charge which is nearly impossible to fight because of the value of christian testimony in shar'ia) then the prophet would have done the very same thing. Indeed, much of what and how to do Islamic things are based on his life. Thus the misconception many have that Islam is the same as other religions who's "kingdom is not on this earth." Islam is political, judicial, theological, military, and civil. Moreover, its shar'ia applies to everyone on earth. Nothing escapes its reach- it is not like the other two monotheistic religions.

The first Koran was written by christians to manipulate the muslims.

The most of the muslims don't know this.

[German Viking]

I'd make a few points in response to arjunadawn and monkeycountry.

1.I make no claim to be a Islam expert, to be clear. I m an athiest. I just believe in truth - Im not defending Islam here. I just dislike oft repeated falsities and twisting of the facts.

2. Sharia law is interpreted by adherents of Islam, it is not set out in the Koran. It is primarily a reflection of the cultural, not religious, values of Middle Eastern societies.

You can be a true Muslim and completely reject sharia law. Yes its true.

TV posts are frequently making this basic mistake.

Mohammed did not set out sharia law, its roots can be traced back long before he was born, in the cultural attitudes of the society of which he was a part. But Islam has moulded it since then for sure.

3. Islam had a venerable tradition of religious tolerance for centuries. Intolerance is not inherent in Islam, it is inherent in some of the humans who interpret it to the masses, and in their cultures. And in ours, apparently.

4. What we know of Mohammed has been passed to us and shaped by Islamic powerbrokers. Much of it (as with the New Testament) is likely suspect. I dont know but I suspect Mohammed would think mob violence a violation of his principles. I could be wrong.

5. At the time of Mohammeds life it was common in Europe for people of all classes to marry girls we today would consider way too young. Royalty, lords, peasants, they all did it. It was culturally acceptable at the time. Its a red herring, monkeycountry. Its meaningless. It says nothing about the man. Also, marriage to very young girls didnt mean sex. Often the girl didnt cohabit with her husband until sexually mature. Hell, even Gandhi married his wife in her very early teens.

6. If we were posting on TV about Christianity back in the Reformation days we'd be saying how bloodthirsty it was and evil. But we know now it was twisted then for political and personal power purposes. It can be a force for good (in the right hands). It isnt inherently evil. Its core message is actually peaceful and hopeful. Same goes for Islam. Its just going through a really bad patch now. And many of its adherents are naive third world peasants with no education, from particularly intolerant cultures, which doesnt help.

Ok, I ve tried. Now let the misrepresentation begin!!

You are right you are no expert on islam so better keep quiet that make yourself look like a complete FOOL

Educate yourself first before posting complete drivel

Please correct him and educate the simple crowd here in TV inclusive myself,

your post is only bla bla.

The question is now who is the fool!!???

[aussiebrian]

People still believe this religion stuff?

Approximatively 5 billion people?

Its worth noting that the 'prophets' on which the 3 major monotheististic religions are based ie Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed, would probably be horrified at what their ' adherents' have done with their ideas.

Buddha in particular was anti-dogma and anti-religion. I have always liked the famous Zen Buddhist saying 'if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him', which captures the spirit nicely.

A more prosaic quote from John Lennon sums it up (I paraphrase) - 'Jesus was alright, but its his disciples twisting things that ruin it for me'.

A mob like the one that bashed these people to death are about as far from Mohammeds message as you can get.

No, the three major monotheistic religions are Judaism, Christianity and Islam. There is no god in Buddhism, even though many of Buddha's followers treat him as one, so we can scrub that note.

There are many prophets in Judaism, but it is not based on a prophet. Islam is based on the prophet Mohammed. Christianity is based on Judaism, Jesus was not a prophet in Christianity, He was the son of god. Jesus was a prophet only in Islam.

It is debatable if Mohammed would have approved of the mob murdering the Christians. As he committed mass murder amongst many other things I don't think he would have lost much sleep over it, so it isn't in all reality too far away from his message.

Edited November 5, 2014 by aussiebrian

[aussiebrian]

The sad thing is that there is one God - you can call God anything you like but it is essentially the same thing. We are all human and if you go back far enough we all come from the same place on Earth, and a Earth shares its beginning from the same place as the rest of our universe. And yet people want to control other people and for some reason want to hurt each other and thus the philosophy of religion is abused to form a dogma and excuse to kill and abuse others. It is rather a sad thing about humans that we have not evolved beyond that yet.

The sad thing is there isn't one god. Thanks, I will call him a figment of your imagination.

[German Viking]

Diamondking

Youve got a big mouth mate. But its easy to spout sh@t and leave out the substance.

Why dont you put your money where your mouth is and tell us why youre the expert. And then tell me where Im wrong.

Go on.

Otherwise crawl back to your pond and bore the cr@p out of the slime.

Well your post is SO FAR OFF BASE that it shows you are completely ignorant on the subject and responding to you with facts would be a waste of time.

BUT since you are so ignorant on the subject let me try and enlighten you

1.) I have read the Quaran and the Hadith you have not

I'd make a few points in response to arjunadawn and monkeycountry.

1.I make no claim to be a Islam expert, to be clear. I m an athiest. I just believe in truth - Im not defending Islam here. I just dislike oft repeated falsities and twisting of the facts.

2. Sharia law is interpreted by adherents of Islam, it is not set out in the Koran. It is primarily a reflection of the cultural, not religious, values of Middle Eastern societies.

You can be a true Muslim and completely reject sharia law. Yes its true.

SOURCE PLEASE

You can see what is happening in Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen when you dont conform to Sharia law but hey if you have a source that says true muslims can reject Sharia I would like to see it

Mohammed did not set out sharia law, its roots can be traced back long before he was born, in the cultural attitudes of the society of which he was a part. But Islam has moulded it since then for sure.

There is a ounce of truth to this

3. Islam had a venerable tradition of religious tolerance for centuries. Intolerance is not inherent in Islam, it is inherent in some of the humans who interpret it to the masses, and in their cultures. And in ours, apparently.

This is COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE and really shows your ignorance, Islam is built on religious intolerance but not only religious intolerance but intolerance for all that are non muslim. Mohammed was war monger and lived his life at Warin 10 years he was involved in 8major wars and many more he oversaw

Islam has never been peaceful even in 2014 it is not at peace with anyone and anyone that says different is just someone who does not know what he is talking about

Anyone with google can easily google Mohammed and see he was a barbaric War Monger

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

These are words from the Quran and no true muslim would ever critisize what is written in the book because it would mean a death sentence

4. What we know of Mohammed has been passed to us and shaped by Islamic powerbrokers. Much of it (as with the New Testament) is likely suspect. I dont know but I suspect Mohammed would think mob violence a violation of his principles. I could be wrong.

Yes you are wrong what we know about Mohammed is what is written in the Quran and Hadiths the Quaran has NEVER been updated or changed since it was put together unlike the Bible which has been changed over the years, it is ABSOLUTELY FORBIDDEN in Islam to EVEN SUGGEST that the prohets words be changed or questioned and of course the penalty we all know is death for anyone who suggests it/

Mohammed was an EXTREMLY violent man who took women and children as war booty and used them as sex slaves this is perfectly acceptable in islam if they are non Muslim so to say Mohammed would think mob violence is a violation on his principles is laughable when you read what he did in the 8 major wars he fought in a 10 year period he even says

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Sounds like he has no principles

5. At the time of Mohammeds life it was common in Europe for people of all classes to marry girls we today would consider way too young. Royalty, lords, peasants, they all did it. It was culturally acceptable at the time. Its a red herring, monkeycountry. Its meaningless. It says nothing about the man. Also, marriage to very young girls didnt mean sex. Often the girl didnt cohabit with her husband until sexually mature. Hell, even Gandhi married his wife in her very early teens.

Ahhh yes you are partly correct here, mainly about it being acceptable back then the difference is ITS STILL HAPPENING IN 2014 where muslims are concerned everyone else has seen the light and realized it is not OK to have sex with a 9 year old girl. (Mohammeds wife Aiesha)

Again you are partially correct about them not having sex with the child until sexually mature well lets talk about the man himself since this is the person ALL MUSLIMS FOLLOW and his name is Mohammed, Mohammed married Aiesha when she was just 6 years old and you are right he waited to have sex with her will she was 9 YEARS OLD this is not made up it it common knowledge for anyone that knows the tinyiest thing about Islam,

Child brides are still being married off just like that in Yemen and other middle eastern countries and to defend it like you have is disgraceful

6. If we were posting on TV about Christianity back in the Reformation days we'd be saying how bloodthirsty it was and evil. But we know now it was twisted then for political and personal power purposes. It can be a force for good (in the right hands). It isnt inherently evil. Its core message is actually peaceful and hopeful. Same goes for Islam. Its just going through a really bad patch now. And many of its adherents are naive third world peasants with no education, from particularly intolerant cultures, which doesnt help.

You are right again HOWEVER Chritianity has moved with the times and those things that are written in the Bible christians know in the year 2014 they are unacceptable and are no longer practiced where as in ISLAM they are still following a book to the T that was written in the 6th century that is the difference and your argument on this point holds no validity.

I'm far away to be a muslim specialist, but I know a lot about human beeing.

We all have to realize Koran and Bible a written by humans to manipulte the crowd.

The problem is to filter out the truth. I agree 100% that new testament is almost not the paper worth that's written on.

I believe a lot in the old testament, this tells a lot about humans beeing.

For example: Eye for eye tooth for tooth. Things like this have does'nt changed until now unfortunately.

The rest are just fairytales for me.

[German Viking]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

And then there's Buddhism.

One of the true "assets" of Thailand.

If only the whole world was Buddhist. Would be a far more peaceful world.

Try telling that to the Burmese.

Being of Buddhist origin really toned down the Khmer Rouge too.

And old Hun Sen is another shining Buddhist example of tolerance and fair play...

People have certainly killed more in the name of Islam & Christianity than Buddhism.

Anyway the buddists coming closer.

[aboctok]

The blasphemy law is self-preserving since nobody can criticise it without they themselves blaspheming, thus it never gets modified.

No law should be self-preserving.

How to tackle it? I don't know.

Hmm. A self-preserving law, eh? Neat idea.

[German Viking]

People still believe this religion stuff?

Approximatively 5 billion people?

Its worth noting that the 'prophets' on which the 3 major monotheististic religions are based ie Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed, would probably be horrified at what their ' adherents' have done with their ideas.

Buddha in particular was anti-dogma and anti-religion. I have always liked the famous Zen Buddhist saying 'if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him', which captures the spirit nicely.

A more prosaic quote from John Lennon sums it up (I paraphrase) - 'Jesus was alright, but its his disciples twisting things that ruin it for me'.

A mob like the one that bashed these people to death are about as far from Mohammeds message as you can get.

No, the three major monotheistic religions are Judaism, Christianity and Islam. There is no god in Buddhism, even though many of Buddha's followers treat him as one, so we can scrub that note.

There are many prophets in Judaism, but it is not based on a prophet. Islam is based on the prophet Mohammed. Christianity is based on Judaism, Jesus was not a prophet in Christianity, He was the son of god. Jesus was a prophet only in Islam.

It is debatable if Mohammed would have approved of the mob murdering the Christians. As he committed mass murder amongst many other things I don't think he would have lost much sleep over it, so it isn't in all reality too far away from his message.

The Christians and the Islam adopted a lot of Prophets from the jewish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophets_in_Islam

[simple1]

It's a great shame the Islamic Ahmadi sect has not gained any real traction. Ahmadis do not support the blasphemy laws and believe no verse of the Qur'an abrogates or cancels another verse.

It is claimed that no one has had the death sentence applied for blasphemy under Pakistani law, although long prison sentences have been applied. Since 1990 50+ have been extrajudicially killed for blasphemy. As has been mentioned a few times in this topic blasphemy laws in Pakistan and some other Islamic majority countries are used as a tool in personal disputes and repression of religious minorities (e.g. Ahmadis). Pakistani poiticians and lawyers against the blasphemy laws have been murdered, go into hiding or forced to flee the country, effectively suppressing attempts for the progression to a more tolerant & just society.

[simondan]

Diamondking

Youve got a big mouth mate. But its easy to spout sh@t and leave out the substance.

Why dont you put your money where your mouth is and tell us why youre the expert. And then tell me where Im wrong.

Go on.

Otherwise crawl back to your pond and bore the cr@p out of the slime.

Well your post is SO FAR OFF BASE that it shows you are completely ignorant on the subject and responding to you with facts would be a waste of time.

BUT since you are so ignorant on the subject let me try and enlighten you

1.) I have read the Quaran and the Hadith you have not

I'd make a few points in response to arjunadawn and monkeycountry.

1.I make no claim to be a Islam expert, to be clear. I m an athiest. I just believe in truth - Im not defending Islam here. I just dislike oft repeated falsities and twisting of the facts.

2. Sharia law is interpreted by adherents of Islam, it is not set out in the Koran. It is primarily a reflection of the cultural, not religious, values of Middle Eastern societies.

You can be a true Muslim and completely reject sharia law. Yes its true.

SOURCE PLEASE

You can see what is happening in Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen when you dont conform to Sharia law but hey if you have a source that says true muslims can reject I would like to see it

Mohammed did not set out sharia law, its roots can be traced back long before he was born, in the cultural attitudes of the society of which he was a part. But Islam has moulded it since then for sure.

There is a ounce of truth to this

3. Islam had a venerable tradition of religious tolerance for centuries. Intolerance is not inherent in Islam, it is inherent in some of the humans who interpret it to the masses, and in their cultures. And in ours, apparently.

This is COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE and really shows your ignorance, Islam is built on religious intolerance but not only religious intolerance but intolerance for all that are non muslim. Mohammed was war monger and lived his life at Warin 10 years he was involved in 8major wars and many more he oversaw

Islam has never been peaceful even in 2014 it is not at peace with anyone and anyone that says different is just someone who does not know what he is talking about

Anyone with google can easily google Mohammed and see he was a barbaric War Monger

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

These are words from the Quran and no true muslim would ever critisize what is written in the book because it would mean a death sentence

4. What we know of Mohammed has been passed to us and shaped by Islamic powerbrokers. Much of it (as with the New Testament) is likely suspect. I dont know but I suspect Mohammed would think mob violence a violation of his principles. I could be wrong.

Yes you are wrong what we know about Mohammed is what is written in the Quran and Hadiths the Quaran has NEVER been updated or changed since it was put together unlike the Bible which has been changed over the years, it is ABSOLUTELY FORBIDDEN in Islam to EVEN SUGGEST that the prohets words be changed or questioned and of course the penalty we all know is death for anyone who suggests it/

Mohammed was an EXTREMLY violent man who took women and children as war booty and used them as sex slaves this is perfectly acceptable in islam if they are non Muslim so to say Mohammed would think mob violence is a violation on his principles is laughable when you read what he did in the 8 major wars he fought in a 10 year period he even says

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Sounds like he has no principles

5. At the time of Mohammeds life it was common in Europe for people of all classes to marry girls we today would consider way too young. Royalty, lords, peasants, they all did it. It was culturally acceptable at the time. Its a red herring, monkeycountry. Its meaningless. It says nothing about the man. Also, marriage to very young girls didnt mean sex. Often the girl didnt cohabit with her husband until sexually mature. Hell, even Gandhi married his wife in her very early teens.

Ahhh yes you are partly correct here, mainly about it being acceptable back then the difference is ITS STILL HAPPENING IN 2014 where muslims are concerned everyone else has seen the light and realized it is not OK to have sex with a 9 year old girl. (Mohammeds wife Aiesha)

Again you are partially correct about them not having sex with the child until sexually mature well lets talk about the man himself since this is the person ALL MUSLIMS FOLLOW and his name is Mohammed, Mohammed married Aiesha when she was just 6 years old and you are right he waited to have sex with her will she was 9 YEARS OLD this is not made up it it common knowledge for anyone that knows the tinyiest thing about Islam,

Child brides are still being married off just like that in Yemen and other middle eastern countries and to defend it like you have is disgraceful

6. If we were posting on TV about Christianity back in the Reformation days we'd be saying how bloodthirsty it was and evil. But we know now it was twisted then for political and personal power purposes. It can be a force for good (in the right hands). It isnt inherently evil. Its core message is actually peaceful and hopeful. Same goes for Islam. Its just going through a really bad patch now. And many of its adherents are naive third world peasants with no education, from particularly intolerant cultures, which doesnt help.

You are right again HOWEVER Chritianity has moved with the times and those things that are written in the Bible christians know in the year 2014 they are unacceptable and are no longer practiced where as in ISLAM they are still following a book to the T that was written in the 6th century that is the difference and your argument on this point holds no validity.

Funny, you start by saying Im way off but throughout your post you admit there is truth is much of I said.

You would be more effective if you toned it down a bit and just addressed the issue.

Keeping it short, I'll just address points of difference.

My source for my comments on sharia law is muslims I have spoken to and interviews with islamic leaders from the UK and Australia. Let me clarify - they say that they disagree with the oft-quoted extreme aspects of sharia law, and feel free to reject stuff like killing non-believers and stoning adulterers etc. But not sharia law in its entirety. Apologies, I didnt make that clear.

They make the point that some (not all) controversial aspects of sharia law are not prescribed in the koran at all but are cultural practices only that have crept in. Sharia law can be but is not always set in stone. It is not as unmoveable as you imply.

Its a historical fact that islamic rulers practiced tolerance to Jewish and Christian communities living within their jurisdiction in pre-1st crusade Jerusalem, in Moorish Spain, and for periods of the Ottoman Empire (mid 14th century particularly). Look it up. Islamic communities have often been peaceful. Your assertion otherwise is incorrect.

Mohammed did not write the koran, it was written by scribes, some parts decades after his death. And there is more than one version, some differ significantly. Again, the facts are not as black and white as you suggest. Although it is true that altering the koran is not allowed as you say, yet still there are versions. Inevitably, historical figures are interpreted by those who come after, in the way that suits them (exactly as you are doing).

In relation to slavery, child brides, war, Muhammed was a man of his times. Just as, for instance, Jefferson was in relation to slavery. To expect more and to criticise him for this after a gap of 1100 years is slightly, er, unrealistic. Practices like that have to be interpreted in their historical context.

Nothing I said defended child sex/brides. Thats another red herring. I find the practice abhorrent in any age. My message was only - consider the historical context.

Ok I think we agree on everything else basically.

Islam isnt going away. We have to learn to live with it. Rabid anti Islamic posts dont progress us at all.

Edited November 6, 2014 by simondan

[JockPieandBeans]

Islam isnt going away. We have to learn to live with it. Rapid anti Islamic posts dont progress us at all.

You have that the wrong way round.

Islam needs to learn live with everyone else.

[DiamondKing]

Its worth noting that the 'prophets' on which the 3 major monotheististic religions are based ie Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed, would probably be horrified at what their ' adherents' have done with their ideas.

Buddha in particular was anti-dogma and anti-religion. I have always liked the famous Zen Buddhist saying 'if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him', which captures the spirit nicely.

A more prosaic quote from John Lennon sums it up (I paraphrase) - 'Jesus was alright, but its his disciples twisting things that ruin it for me'.

A mob like the one that bashed these people to death are about as far from Mohammeds message as you can get.

I regret I do not agree. The highest ideal of any living muslim is to emulate their prophet. Indeed, much of their lives are spent studying how the prophet executed his life, and others. Thus the problem: the "adherents" are actually emulating the life of the prophet. If you can show me where this is incorrect I stand corrected.

Mohammed probably would not have have aimlessly killed other people of the book because they were christians but if charged with desecrating the koran or Islamic blasphemy (a charge which is nearly impossible to fight because of the value of christian testimony in shar'ia) then the prophet would have done the very same thing. Indeed, much of what and how to do Islamic things are based on his life. Thus the misconception many have that Islam is the same as other religions who's "kingdom is not on this earth." Islam is political, judicial, theological, military, and civil. Moreover, its shar'ia applies to everyone on earth. Nothing escapes its reach- it is not like the other two monotheistic religions.

The first Koran was written by christians to manipulate the muslims.

The most of the muslims don't know this.

COMPLETE AND UTTER RUBBISH

Source please

[Thaiready]

The sad thing is that there is one God - you can call God anything you like but it is essentially the same thing. We are all human and if you go back far enough we all come from the same place on Earth, and a Earth shares its beginning from the same place as the rest of our universe. And yet people want to control other people and for some reason want to hurt each other and thus the philosophy of religion is abused to form a dogma and excuse to kill and abuse others. It is rather a sad thing about humans that we have not evolved beyond that yet.

No. The sad thing is there is NO god. Which makes acts like this so much more pointless.

Bloody savages.

I suppose you have proof to back your claims of NO God.

[simondan]

Islam isnt going away. We have to learn to live with it. Rapid anti Islamic posts dont progress us at all.

You have that the wrong way round.

Islam needs to learn live with everyone else.

Dont we all?

I dont disagree with you.

[simondan]

The sad thing is that there is one God - you can call God anything you like but it is essentially the same thing. We are all human and if you go back far enough we all come from the same place on Earth, and a Earth shares its beginning from the same place as the rest of our universe. And yet people want to control other people and for some reason want to hurt each other and thus the philosophy of religion is abused to form a dogma and excuse to kill and abuse others. It is rather a sad thing about humans that we have not evolved beyond that yet.

No. The sad thing is there is NO god. Which makes acts like this so much more pointless.

Bloody savages.

I suppose you have proof to back your claims of NO God.

You show me yours, I'll show you mine

[arjunadawn]

Its worth noting that the 'prophets' on which the 3 major monotheististic religions are based ie Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed, would probably be horrified at what their ' adherents' have done with their ideas.

Buddha in particular was anti-dogma and anti-religion. I have always liked the famous Zen Buddhist saying 'if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him', which captures the spirit nicely.

A more prosaic quote from John Lennon sums it up (I paraphrase) - 'Jesus was alright, but its his disciples twisting things that ruin it for me'.

A mob like the one that bashed these people to death are about as far from Mohammeds message as you can get.

I regret I do not agree. The highest ideal of any living muslim is to emulate their prophet. Indeed, much of their lives are spent studying how the prophet executed his life, and others. Thus the problem: the "adherents" are actually emulating the life of the prophet. If you can show me where this is incorrect I stand corrected.

Mohammed probably would not have have aimlessly killed other people of the book because they were christians but if charged with desecrating the koran or Islamic blasphemy (a charge which is nearly impossible to fight because of the value of christian testimony in shar'ia) then the prophet would have done the very same thing. Indeed, much of what and how to do Islamic things are based on his life. Thus the misconception many have that Islam is the same as other religions who's "kingdom is not on this earth." Islam is political, judicial, theological, military, and civil. Moreover, its shar'ia applies to everyone on earth. Nothing escapes its reach- it is not like the other two monotheistic religions.

The first Koran was written by christians to manipulate the muslims.

The most of the muslims don't know this.

COMPLETE AND UTTER RUBBISH

Source please

I think your stating the first Koran was published by Christians is complete and utter rubbish. I totally agree. I've not yet heard such a ridiculous thing.

[joecoolfrog]

In a legal sense it shouldn't matter one tiny bit whether there is or is not a 'God' , its of philosophical and theological interest only.

In a perfect world all laws would be secular , all societies pluralistic and all people free to follow their belief systems without fear or favour.

[simondan]

The sad thing is that there is one God - you can call God anything you like but it is essentially the same thing. We are all human and if you go back far enough we all come from the same place on Earth, and a Earth shares its beginning from the same place as the rest of our universe. And yet people want to control other people and for some reason want to hurt each other and thus the philosophy of religion is abused to form a dogma and excuse to kill and abuse others. It is rather a sad thing about humans that we have not evolved beyond that yet.

No. The sad thing is there is NO god. Which makes acts like this so much more pointless.

Bloody savages.

I suppose you have proof to back your claims of NO God.

You show me yours, I'll show you mine

Ok I'll go first.

A couple of years ago I spent 40 days wandering around in the wilderness. You know, as you do.

Suddenly, a bush lit up in front of me and a dude with wings appeared. And a voice came booming from the sky.

'God does not exist! Tell everyone.' he/it said. The angel just nodded knowingly.

After I picked myself up from the ground I got a bit sus.

'You sure you arent Richard Dawkins in an angel suit?' I asked.

'I wish! Every year I moult and it itches like a bitch for months. Being an angel aint all its cracked up to be'.

So ever since Ive been on a mission to deny God. The little details like the moult are what convinced me. And the burning bush.

If you believe in God this should be enough for you. Its certainly enough for all the other God-botherers out there.

Have a nice day and spread the word!

[DiamondKing]

Diamondking

Youve got a big mouth mate. But its easy to spout sh@t and leave out the substance.

Why dont you put your money where your mouth is and tell us why youre the expert. And then tell me where Im wrong.

Go on.

Otherwise crawl back to your pond and bore the cr@p out of the slime.

Well your post is SO FAR OFF BASE that it shows you are completely ignorant on the subject and responding to you with facts would be a waste of time.

BUT since you are so ignorant on the subject let me try and enlighten you

1.) I have read the Quaran and the Hadith you have not

I'd make a few points in response to arjunadawn and monkeycountry.

1.I make no claim to be a Islam expert, to be clear. I m an athiest. I just believe in truth - Im not defending Islam here. I just dislike oft repeated falsities and twisting of the facts.

2. Sharia law is interpreted by adherents of Islam, it is not set out in the Koran. It is primarily a reflection of the cultural, not religious, values of Middle Eastern societies.

You can be a true Muslim and completely reject sharia law. Yes its true.

SOURCE PLEASE

You can see what is happening in Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen when you dont conform to Sharia law but hey if you have a source that says true muslims can reject I would like to see it

Mohammed did not set out sharia law, its roots can be traced back long before he was born, in the cultural attitudes of the society of which he was a part. But Islam has moulded it since then for sure.

There is a ounce of truth to this

3. Islam had a venerable tradition of religious tolerance for centuries. Intolerance is not inherent in Islam, it is inherent in some of the humans who interpret it to the masses, and in their cultures. And in ours, apparently.

This is COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE and really shows your ignorance, Islam is built on religious intolerance but not only religious intolerance but intolerance for all that are non muslim. Mohammed was war monger and lived his life at Warin 10 years he was involved in 8major wars and many more he oversaw

Islam has never been peaceful even in 2014 it is not at peace with anyone and anyone that says different is just someone who does not know what he is talking about

Anyone with google can easily google Mohammed and see he was a barbaric War Monger

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

These are words from the Quran and no true muslim would ever critisize what is written in the book because it would mean a death sentence

4. What we know of Mohammed has been passed to us and shaped by Islamic powerbrokers. Much of it (as with the New Testament) is likely suspect. I dont know but I suspect Mohammed would think mob violence a violation of his principles. I could be wrong.

Yes you are wrong what we know about Mohammed is what is written in the Quran and Hadiths the Quaran has NEVER been updated or changed since it was put together unlike the Bible which has been changed over the years, it is ABSOLUTELY FORBIDDEN in Islam to EVEN SUGGEST that the prohets words be changed or questioned and of course the penalty we all know is death for anyone who suggests it/

Mohammed was an EXTREMLY violent man who took women and children as war booty and used them as sex slaves this is perfectly acceptable in islam if they are non Muslim so to say Mohammed would think mob violence is a violation on his principles is laughable when you read what he did in the 8 major wars he fought in a 10 year period he even says

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Sounds like he has no principles

5. At the time of Mohammeds life it was common in Europe for people of all classes to marry girls we today would consider way too young. Royalty, lords, peasants, they all did it. It was culturally acceptable at the time. Its a red herring, monkeycountry. Its meaningless. It says nothing about the man. Also, marriage to very young girls didnt mean sex. Often the girl didnt cohabit with her husband until sexually mature. Hell, even Gandhi married his wife in her very early teens.

Ahhh yes you are partly correct here, mainly about it being acceptable back then the difference is ITS STILL HAPPENING IN 2014 where muslims are concerned everyone else has seen the light and realized it is not OK to have sex with a 9 year old girl. (Mohammeds wife Aiesha)

Again you are partially correct about them not having sex with the child until sexually mature well lets talk about the man himself since this is the person ALL MUSLIMS FOLLOW and his name is Mohammed, Mohammed married Aiesha when she was just 6 years old and you are right he waited to have sex with her will she was 9 YEARS OLD this is not made up it it common knowledge for anyone that knows the tinyiest thing about Islam,

Child brides are still being married off just like that in Yemen and other middle eastern countries and to defend it like you have is disgraceful

6. If we were posting on TV about Christianity back in the Reformation days we'd be saying how bloodthirsty it was and evil. But we know now it was twisted then for political and personal power purposes. It can be a force for good (in the right hands). It isnt inherently evil. Its core message is actually peaceful and hopeful. Same goes for Islam. Its just going through a really bad patch now. And many of its adherents are naive third world peasants with no education, from particularly intolerant cultures, which doesnt help.

You are right again HOWEVER Chritianity has moved with the times and those things that are written in the Bible christians know in the year 2014 they are unacceptable and are no longer practiced where as in ISLAM they are still following a book to the T that was written in the 6th century that is the difference and your argument on this point holds no validity.

My source for my comments on sharia law is muslims I have spoken to and interviews with islamic leaders from the UK and Australia. Let me clarify - they say that they disagree with the oft-quoted extreme aspects of sharia law, and feel free to reject stuff like killing non-believers and stoning adulterers etc. But not sharia law in its entirety. Apologies, I didnt make that clear.

So you don't have a source for your comment other than Muslims and Islamis leaders you personally have spoken with ???? SERIOUSLY

They make the point that some (not all) controversial aspects of sharia law are not prescribed in the koran at all but are cultural practices only that have crept in. Sharia law can be but is not always set in stone. It is not as unmoveable as you imply.

I think we need to make clear what SHARIA IS IN THE QUARAN and it is practised by muslims in many countries I could write pages on this but the below should suffice if you need to see people beheadings, hands being cut off, women being stoned, etc etc all punishments in MANY Islamic countries who are govenerned by the Sharia according to the Quaran I have a compilation of videos to back up my argument. Saudi Arabia the birthplace of Mohammed (was not called saudi Arabia when Mohammed was born) has the strictest form of Sharia which is imposed on its people.

Sharia law is the law of Islam. The Sharia (also spelled Shariah or Shari'a) law is cast from the actions and words of Muhammed, which are called "Sunnah," and the Quaran, which he authored. (you say he did not author it WELL ask any Muslim who wrote it and you will be proven wrong or just use Google)

The Sharia law itself cannot be altered, but the interpretation of the Sharia law, called "figh," by imams is given some leeway.

As a legal system, the Sharia law covers a very wide range of topics. While other legal codes deal primarily with public behavior, Sharia law covers public behavior, private behavior and private beliefs. Of all legal systems in the world today, Islam's Sharia law is the most intrusive and strict, especially against women.

According to the Sharia law:

• Theft is punishable by amputation of the right hand (above). I can post videos of this as proof from multiple muslim countries govenred by Sharia

• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quaran is punishable by death. I can post examples of this from multiple muslim countries also

• Criticizing or denying Muhammad is a prophet is punishable by death. i can post prof of this also

• Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death. and this

• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death.and this

• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.and this

• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death. had a recent case of this in Somalia although they were rescued

• A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old. Can easlly prove this it is written in the quaran itself

• Girls' clitoris should be cut (per Muhammed's words in Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251). Can prove this is happening in the UK 64,000 cases so far

• A woman can have 1 husband, but a man can have up to 4 wives; Muhammed can have more. Easy to Prove

• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife but a woman needs her husband's consent to divorce. He only has to say 3 times I divorce you and she is left with nothing

• A man can beat his wife for insubordination. Yes easily proven with multiple IMAM video on youtube showing how to beat your wife the correct way

• Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman. Many cases in Dubai and other 2014 Muslim countrues where this can be collaberated want the links just ask

• A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s). Unless she has 4 male muslim witnesses to testify for her

• A woman's testimony in court, allowed only in property cases, carries half the weight of a man's. Words written in the Quran

• A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits. can prove this

• A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval). Saudi Arabia 2014 is the classic example here also they cannot eat with a fork only a knife

• A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative. Many cases in Muslim countries

• Meat to be eaten must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah - HALAL Ahhh another great subject to debate horrific and barbaric

• Muslims should engage in Taquiya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam. This is what your Muslim Friends did to you that told you about Sharia Law

Where is the Sharia law in use?

every muslim country you can think of as well as many NON MUSLIM countries

Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Muhammad is considered the most strict form of Sharia and It has no legal code other than the Sharia, which is enforced without mercy if you want a link to PROVE THAT here it is www.billionbibles.org/sharia/saudi-arabia-sharia-law.html

Its a historical fact that islamic rulers practiced tolerance to Jewish and Christian communities living within their jurisdiction in pre-1st crusade Jerusalem, in Moorish Spain, and for periods of the Ottoman Empire (mid 14th century particularly). Look it up. Islamic communities have often been peaceful. Your assertion otherwise is incorrect.

All what you say above is correct however you missed some important points, Islam CONQUERED all those nations and once a nation is ruled by muslims the non muslims have 2 choices convert to islam or live under the Sharia and pay an ANNUAL TAX to the muslims which is called Jizya (look it up) if they pay that they can live as second class citizens and live in peace, there is a third choice is you do not like those 2 and that is DEATH.

Mohammed did not write the koran, it was written by scribes, some parts decades after his death. And there is more than one version, some differ significantly. Again, the facts are not as black and white as you suggest. Although it is true that altering the koran is not allowed as you say, yet still there are versions. Inevitably, historical figures are interpreted by those who come after, in the way that suits them (exactly as you are doing).

I will let the words of Muslims themselves answer this one

the Quran was verbally revealed by God to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel (Jibril), gradually over a period of approximately 23 years, beginning on 22 December 609 CE, when Muhammad was 40, and concluding in 632 CE, the year of his death.

Since the guy was dumb as a brick could not read or write i end to agree with you on this one

In relation to slavery, child brides, war, Muhammed was a man of his times. Just as, for instance, Jefferson was in relation to slavery. To expect more and to criticise him for this after a gap of 1100 years is slightly, er, unrealistic. Practices like that have to be interpreted in their historical context.

Well since Muslims are STILL FOLLOWING HIS LEAD IN 2014 and taking War booty and having child brides and following his teaching to the book (boco haram, Syria UK etc etc I think we can still crticise him

Nothing I said defended child sex/brides. Thats another red herring. I find the practice abhorrent in any age. My message was only - consider the historical context.

We are in 2014 and it is STILL GOING ON because of ISLAM and the teachings of Muhammed its not a red herring ITS REALITY in 2014

Islam isnt going away. We have to learn to live with it. Rabid anti Islamic posts dont progress us at all.

I admit I am ANTI ISLAMIC because they are BARBARIC they hate HOMOSEXUALS and want to put them to death they belittle women they hate anyone that is not a muslim I can SEE NOTHING POSTIVE in this cult and I mean NOTHING.

They will NEVER learn to live with us (just look at Israel)

[simondan]

DiamondKing I think we agree on most facts (and I bow to your greater learning on this subject) - its just how you and I interpret them that differs. So be it. I admit I wouldnt quote personal conversations with Muslims or interviews as evidence if I was writing for Science journal, but this is TV. And such sources are commonly accepted in the historical sciences.

For the record, I find Sharia law and many (most) aspects of Islam abhorrent. Particularly their patriachal approach and attitude to homosexuality (although the Arabic ones are quite fond of the ladyboys here in Thailand - hypocrites!). And crime and punishment. Etc...

But I do credit moderates in mostly Western countries with trying to change the extreme aspects. You are cynical -so am I to an extent.

But hating Islam in general, IMHO, wont get us anywhere.

Fight IS and the extremists ruthlessly, but reward the moderates. Again, IMHO.

[Mot Dang]

Its like taking a time machine back to the Stone Age.

Calling it the Stone Age is quite right, these heathens think "stoning" is still a legitimate punishment for blasphemy, lose of family face etc. It exists in the Middle East, parts of Africa, India and Pakistan (and probably every other "-stan"). I always think that much of the national mindset in these countries has not developed much more since the time of the Crusades. After all Saddam thought he was the reincarnation of Saladin. That seemed to give him legitimacy to his brutality.

When I was younger "looking for the truth", I had developed a respect for Islam, but how can one continue to do this in the first decade of the 21st century, when so much of the brutality is said to be sanctioned by their holy books ? Who do you believe ?

[DiamondKing]

DiamondKing I think we agree on most facts (and I bow to your greater learning on this subject) - its just how you and I interpret them that differs. So be it. I admit I wouldnt quote personal conversations with Muslims or interviews as evidence if I was writing for Science journal, but this is TV. And such sources are commonly accepted in the historical sciences.

For the record, I find Sharia law and many (most) aspects of Islam abhorrent. Particularly their patriachal approach and attitude to homosexuality (although the Arabic ones are quite fond of the ladyboys here in Thailand - hypocrites!). And crime and punishment. Etc...

But I do credit moderates in mostly Western countries with trying to change the extreme aspects. You are cynical -so am I to an extent.

But hating Islam in general, IMHO, wont get us anywhere.

Fight IS and the extremists ruthlessly, but reward the moderates. Again, IMHO.

The problem with the so called Moderates is they are irrelevant they sit back and do nothing other than a few Imams coming out and condemiing so called atrocitys done in the name of Allah HOWEVER if someone draws a cartoon of Mohammed like the danish guy then Moderates and extremist spill out onto the streets worldwide in there HUNDRED OF THOUSANDS calling for the death of the cartoonist.

This CLEARLY SHOWS where the so called Moderates allegiences lie when they come out in the hundreds of thousands burning flags and really making a stance over a cartoon BUT DO NOTHING WHEN people beheaded or the 7-7 bombings or 911 or the beheading of Lee Rigby etc etc, I could go on but I think you get my point

So called moderates do not need to be rewarded because it is CLEAR BY THEIR NON ACTION where their REAL ALLEGIENCES lie.

On your point about them liking ladyboys this is pretty inline with Islam and this documentary will show you just how hypocritical these people really are

Edited November 6, 2014 by DiamondKing

[German Viking]

The first Koran was written by christians to manipulate the muslims.

The most of the muslims don't know this.

Below some link to this theory.

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/7025?eng=y

http://www.inthenameofallah.org/Authors%20of%20the%20Quran.html

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/90495

[canman]

The first Koran was written by christians to manipulate the muslims.

The most of the muslims don't know this.

Below some link to this theory.

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/7025?eng=y

http://www.inthenameofallah.org/Authors%20of%20the%20Quran.html

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/90495

Some interesting reading there.

[arjunadawn]

The first Koran was written by christians to manipulate the muslims.

The most of the muslims don't know this.

Below some link to this theory.

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/7025?eng=y

http://www.inthenameofallah.org/Authors%20of%20the%20Quran.html

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/90495

I am surprised. I hold D Pipes in high regard. Any research he's done I'd take seriously. I'll check out the other links when home. Wow! A very interesting post. Thank you very much. Oddly, as so much of Koranic script is clearly lifted it actually doesn't surprise me- though I guess I was surprised by the earlier post. Thks guys.

Edit: the D Pipes link is not worthy of his research. This is clearly an inferior argument by another, irrespective of the merit of the charge others created the Koran. It's frankly just a Christian protest. The second site, which I've occasionally read, also compromises objectivity by virtue of its decidedly religious bent.

However, the last site- http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/7025?eng=y actually has some interesting points. Undoubtedly the Koran was contrived and plagerized, reframing competitive ideologies in a view that empowered Islam politically and militarily but also attempted to compromise other neighboring practices. That non Muslims had involvement and this can be linguistically deduced makes sense. I find it a bit more problematic to accept a deliberate theological effort to poison the Koran, especially in such an arcane manner that only specialists would note. But thx

Edited November 6, 2014 by arjunadawn

[German Viking]

The first Koran was written by christians to manipulate the muslims.

The most of the muslims don't know this.

Below some link to this theory.

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/7025?eng=y

http://www.inthenameofallah.org/Authors%20of%20the%20Quran.html

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/90495

I am surprised. I hold D Pipes in high regard. Any research he's done I'd take seriously. I'll check out the other links when home. Wow! A very interesting post. Thank you very much. Oddly, as so much of Koranic script is clearly lifted it actually doesn't surprise me- though I guess I was surprised by the earlier post. Thks guys.

Edit: the D Pipes link is not worthy of his research. This is clearly an inferior argument by another, irrespective of the merit of the charge others created the Koran. It's frankly just a Christian protest. The second site, which I've occasionally read, also compromises objectivity by virtue of its decidedly religious bent.

However, the last site- http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/7025?eng=y actually has some interesting points. Undoubtedly the Koran was contrived and plagerized, reframing competitive ideologies in a view that empowered Islam politically and militarily but also attempted to compromise other neighboring practices. That non Muslims had involvement and this can be linguistically deduced makes sense. I find it a bit more problematic to accept a deliberate theological effort to poison the Koran, especially in such an arcane manner that only specialists would note. But thx

I'm born and raised as Christian by my very religious mother, but actually I don't having any sympathy to any religion in this world.

On the first link the research of the german Prof. who is going to the roots of the original language of the Quran, makes sence for me, about the wrong translations.

In any books are made more or less mistakes while translation and in top the wrong interpretations.

For example:

The first bible translated from latin to german was full of mistakes, caused the translation from old greek to latin was already bad and then into german more mistakes appeared.

The best translation into german ever until now, was from the old greek version direct into german made by Martin Luther. Anyway this makes not everything true what is written there, specially the New Testament is full of Fairytales.

The celibate rule for catholic priests, which was issued in the concil of 1139 in Rome.

Reason: The church was afraid, if the priests getting married, then their wifes could inherit all their fortune, but told the simple priests they have to be chastely, while serving god.

Created by cardinals who all had their mistresses, hypocraty as it is the best.

Another example of human being is:

If you don't like other ppl theories, then just blame or probably stone them.

Albert Einstein with his theories was also blamed, caused his collegues was to stupid to understand these theories.

Darwin was also blamed on the first hand with his evolutions theories, if he was catholic,

then he would be excommunicated.

Several cases in middleage was on the way to be burnt, they had to deny their theories, caused of the intervention of the church. Keppler, Kopernikus, Galileo etc.

And in top the Inquisition, this is not my religion anymore.

For me mission accoplished.

Carpe diem

[marcusd]

Ahh ISLAM. always we are told Islam is a religion of peace.

Pieces more true in most cases

[marcusd]

And then there's Buddhism.

One of the true "assets" of Thailand.

If only the whole world was Buddhist. Would be a far more peaceful world.

Try telling that to the Burmese.

Being of Buddhist origin really toned down the Khmer Rouge too.

And old Hun Sen is another shining Buddhist example of tolerance and fair play...

And china too... No one is perfect. Religion is a tool to control people to make them do terrible things to eachother

[simple1]

A small victory for the victims families.

Pakistan arrests 43 over 'blasphemy' killings. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29911857

[loongdavid]

A small victory for the victims families.

Pakistan arrests 43 over 'blasphemy' killings. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29911857

I wouldn't even call it that as any one arrested for this crime will be tried in a Sharia Court and ultimately found not guilty. This action is purely and simply for the benefit of foreign news services, it will do absolutely nothing for religious tolerance in Pakistan.