God is english Allah islam they are meant to be the same just like the youruba bible but the way it is interpreted is what i feel causes most of these problems these islamic sucide bombers who feel killing people will give them a place in heaven or something like that are they reading a differnt koran? i dont think so but they are being mislead by so called leaders and there are those doing it simply beacuse they hate the americans but those who kill their fellow muslims feel they are doing Gods work so they actually belive they are obeying god and has far as am concerned their is nothing that is worth taking another mans life

chrisd:

Well, if it was not for the cartoons there would have not been problems right. I don't think many people understand international relations, especially people in the media and journalists.

What are you saying? That appeasement is the answer to these threaths?
Those cartoons have been published. The act of publishing these cartoons showed bad taste. The reaction to the publishing was completely out of proprtion. Nothing can justify that kind of behaviour. After those violent protests, many western media decided to publish these cartoons in the name of the freedom of press. It was a courageous thing to do. The line had to be drawn. Tolerance and tact towards other cultures and religions can only go that far. There were calls for censorship and that is absolutely unacceptable.

Freedom of speech and opinion is [b]fundamental [/b]to the functioning of a democracy. I don't care if it makes international relations more difficult.

That was not freedom of speech. That was made to make the muslim world react. Freedom of speech is not putting those cartoons. And those reactions were out of proportion according to non-muslims. But it was not to non-muslims that they were addressed. If it was an article about some aspect of Islam I would have understood that, but for those who put the cartoons was not about freedom of speech but as a joke. Never understood the context of those cartoons. Other published those catoons too, but for me it was not a courageous thing to do, was just stupid and silly. That was why you got such commotion.

chrisd:

That was not freedom of speech.

Oh no? And what was it then?

chrisd:

That was made to make the muslim world react.

They published those cartoons because the author of a children's book abou the life of Muhammed could not find one person to illustrate his book. Whether or not that's a good reson is debatable ,but they were expressing an opinion and it was not primarily targeted at a muslim audience.

chrisd:

Freedom of speech is not putting those cartoons.

Now you have to explain that.

chrisd:

And those reactions were out of proportion according to non-muslims.

I honestly don't care according to whom they were out of proportion. Killing people and torching embassies because of the publishing of cartoons is out of proprtion to anybody but lunatics.

chrisd:

But it was not to non-muslims that they were addressed.

Really? On the basis of whatdo you make that statement? And even if it was targeted at muslims, does that mean they are no longer free speech?

chrisd:

If it was an article about some aspect of Islam I would have understood that, but for those who put the cartoons was not about freedom of speech but as a joke. Never understood the context of those cartoons. Other published those catoons too, but for me it was not a courageous thing to do, was just stupid and silly. That was why you got such commotion.

Even silly and stupid speech is protected. You better inform yourself about the context.

Do you actually care about the functioning of democracy?

Democracy? Giving the power to the people by allowing them to choose who they are governed by. Great in theory, but too bad, people are idiots.

What do we get from democracy? We get the freedom to receive TRUE information on the evening news, or the newspapers, WITHOUT bias or personal opinion. Too bad we don't actually get that. We get news updates: "And tonight on *insert generic TV News show*, which hair care product is the most effective?". Evidence they don't give a flying Bleep. And quite frankly, neither doI. I mean really, who cares some kids starving in Africa, as long as it isn't us? Apathy is far more enjoyable compared to having to make a choice, or having to make a stand. This is quite simply because people don't want freedom to make changes for themselves, merely the illusion that they do. If their systems lets them put a little number next to a name, stick it in a ballot box and feel that they have made their contribution, then that's all they care about.

In addition in democracy we still have politital villians, I mean every president has lied so many times on serious subjects.

The main flaw with a dictatorship is that the leader may do something that pisses alot of people off, and you can be assured that all the bleeding heart, "I'm-so-left-wing-I-want-to-cream-my-pants", political wankers who run like scared little rabbits at the mere mention of the words "communism" or "socialism" will argue this point to the death. Perhaps they should realise that the leader in a dictatorship can be overthrown. The few of them who don't run off will most likely attempt to argue: "oh, but an uprising would mean violence", and in reply to them, a resounding "yes" will be shouted by every right wing person present. Yes, it would take violence. It would mean death. Congratulations, you now have a basic idea of politics.

Without wars the "United States of America" would still be the "not-so-united bunch of slaves to the west, with the freedom of ownership by England".

If God is all powerful, and on both Iraq's and America's sides, then why do we have a body count? Why was there a war in the first place? Perhaps God sees war as a necessary part of our lives. Or maybe he doesn't exist.

What I love about democracy is that all the little Christians in our Christian-based society who fear a dictatorship, completely ignore the fact that they are spending their lives preaching for one of the biggest dictators ever: God. How many Christians do you know who believe in a democracy, instead of being lead by God or his messengers? Hopefully not too many, or the Christians are stupider than I first thought.

I tell you another thing about Democracy, I've noticed that Seun here has decided that since many Christians (and a few Muslims) are upset with the fact that the most active members on the Religion Forum are atheists and anti-religion, he feels that he needs is to have sections of the site where Christians only (or Muslims only) can commune with each other without being interrupted by unbelievers. Very democratic

I think that Democracy never actually happened, it's like a fairy tale that some want to believe

chrisd:

If God is all powerful, and on both Iraq's and America's sides, then why do we have a body count? Why was there a war in the first place? Perhaps God sees war as a necessary part of our lives. Or maybe he doesn't exist.,,, How many Christians do you know who believe in a democracy, instead of being lead by God or his messengers? Hopefully not too many, or the Christians are stupider than I first thought.

chrisd, you obviously have a problem. You are so incoherent in your arguments that you make very little sense, if any at all. I can't understand how you could claim to be a Christian and then attack the God you pretend to worship. Or, why would you state that "the Chrsitians are stupider" than you first thought, if you're not one of them? My best guess is that you're neither Christian nor Moslem, but just posing as one or the other. It would do you a world of good to drop the farce before you become a problem to yourself.

Actually it was an attack on democracy, not God. And yes I am christian, perhaps not the typical one though. But I'm not that bad as you say.

Perhaps I spend too much time with the secular world. What you think?

A true Christian will not suggest the things you have said; and it doesn't sound like your attack was directed at democracy - unless you don't understand your own write-ups in the first place.

Or maybe it means that you're not an advanced thinker like me. Being a christian is not being a fundamentalist. Or haven't you learned that at University?

Make some sense. You don't sound anything like an "advanced thinker" - so you don't need to be self-congratulatory. Nothing in my posts suggests that I'm a fundamentalist, so I don't know why that should come up at all.

Ok, maybe I went over the top.

"Moslem"? What a bad spelling! We're Muslims -- not "Moslems."

Either spelling is correct - Moslem or Muslim. Check your dictionary.

Qur'an or Koran is another example.

We can teach them the alphabet again. I come from semitic county. We know how to spell.

Maybe the person who wrote the dictionary is not so clever.

chrisd:

We can teach them the alphabet again. I come from semitic county. We know how to spell.

And you didn't know that my spellings were correct?

chrisd:

Maybe the person who wrote the dictionary is not so clever.

And what version of dictionary undergirds your education?

Are you going to argue with me concerning my faith? And what dictionary are you referring to? The one written by the kufars like yourself? Please, we are Muslim! Never a "Moslem."

Ajisafe:

Are you going to argue with me concerning my faith? And what dictionary are you referring to? The one written by the kufars like yourself? Please, we are Muslim! Never a "Moslem."

And Muslim is what language? If the dictionary for "Moslem" is wrong, which kufars wrote your own "Muslim" dictionary?

Ajisafe:

Are you going to argue with me concerning my faith? And what dictionary are you referring to? The one written by the kufars like yourself? Please, we are Muslim! Never a "Moslem."

You know, Ajisafe, that the white South-African racist have approriated your muslim word kufar and use it against black South-Africans. Kind of ironic, isn't it?

He is right on this one, really. The word is pronounced "Mus"-lim in Arabic but some English dictionaries allow both.

Yep, Nferyn. Ironic.

nferyn:

You know, Ajisafe, that the white South-African racist have approriated your mulsim word kufar and use it gainst black South-Africans. Kind of ironic, isn't it?

Awww, nferyn, I was just going to point that out to him. But I rest my case. So much for our "know-it-all" attitudes.

chrisd:

He is right on this one, really. The word is pronounced "Mus"-lim in Arabic but some English dictionaries allow both.

Glad you see that

Ajisafe:

Yep, Nferyn. Ironic.

I wonder why you choose these words and why you even speak to me, I'm not even dhimmi (I hope I spelled that right )

We must stick true to the original right. That's what the Bible tells us.

Chrisd,

I personally am not in need of any forum where only christians are allowed to share opinions.

You see, for some of us , we prefer where it is darkest, for that is where our light shines ever so brightly.

Everyone needs to hear the word, at least as a witness agianst them for the day of judgement.

So lets ride on ,  for the contrary winds will only drive our roots deeper.

Qur'an or Koran is another example.

Actually, the right pronounciation and; of course, spelling is QUR'AN. Mind you, just because there are English dictionaries out there don't mean that they can force their opinions (wrongly) on us. Often times, these Westerners have done things stupidly whether inadvertently or perhaps knowingly. For example, for eons, they have made us to beleive that "Bombay, India" are the right words, whereas, the right ones are "Munbai, India." Another example will be "Munich, Germany," the locals proudly call their city "Munchen, Germany." What can we call these? Arrogance or sheer ignorance?

You know, Ajisafe, that the white South-African racist have approriated your muslim word kufar and use it against black South-Africans. Kind of ironic, isn't it?

The White racists in South Africa refer (in their Afrikaan language) to both the Blacks and the Indian descents as "Kafirs." This word is definitely Arabic, so for them to use it in their disgraced Afrikaan will be tantamount to foolishness.

I wonder why you choose these words and why you even speak to me, I'm not even dhimmi (I hope I spelled that right )

I don't understand your post, man. If you're referring to what happened the order time, you're only acting like a child. I told you then and I'll tell you again: THE POST WAS NOT MEANT FOR YOU. If you're still beefing about it, well, I can't help you.

Ajisafe,
Applause!! For the first time I couldn't find acrid language in your post, and I hope you would keep that civility, unless it fluctuates. However, when you try to correct people, especially about spellings and all those trivial stuff, there'll be no end in sight. To make matters worse, it might only put you on spotlight. Check out the following blooper in your 'corrective' post:

    Actually, the right pronounciation,,,
    That should have been "pronunciation" (drop the 'o' after the first 'n')

     for eons, they have made us to beleive that "Bombay
     "believe" is the correct spelling ('i' before 'e' after 'l' except in words with 'c' where 'e' comes before 'i' as in receive or conceive)

No one's perfect - we all make mistakes. But then, thank you for pointing them out: I've had the good fortune of going back to my ABC's in the rules of grammar (or is it gra[b]m[/b]er or gramm[b]e[/b]r?) and good writing.

Ajisafe: For example, for eons, they have made us to beleive that "Bombay, India" are the right words, whereas, the right ones are "Munbai, India." Another example will be "Munich, Germany," the locals proudly call their city "Munchen, Germany." What can we call these? Arrogance or sheer ignorance?

At least, when we read of 'Bombay' there's no confusing the fact that it's the same place as 'Mumbai' (not 'Mu[b]n[/b]bai' - I can't find that on any map) in India. Let me offer a little more to this amusement: the citizens of Sweden proudly call their country "Sverige" (don't bite your tongue in trying to pronounce that); and the locals in the southwest of the country call their city "Gotebörg" instead of the widely used 'Gothenburg'. Even the Muslims I know there use either spellings, and no one would be confused that the southwest of Sweden was being refered to (although, the only other "Gothenburg" I know of is in Nebraska, USA!). So, ajisafe, what do we do in these other cases of "arrogance or sheer ignorance"? I guess you'll have to gather non-kufars to come up with a suitable dictionary with new names for "Sverige" (instead of 'Sweden') and "Göteborg" (instead of 'Gothenburg'). No one is forcing their opinions on you by spelling it 'Qur'an' (or 'Koran') and 'Muslim' (or 'Moslem'). Besides, these are just matters of your own thoughts and not shared by many other Muslim believers.

Secondly, there's no need to make so much of the issue because whether you write it as 'Qur'an' or 'Muslim', you're still using the same alphabets of the 'kufars' who wrote it as 'Koran' and 'Moslem' - they're all written in English alphabets. It is like asking which is the correct spelling of the past tense of 'spell' - is it 'spelt' or 'spelled'? Incidentally, you allowed nferyn to use the one ("spelled" from the Westerners that you described as having "done things stupidly." I hope that wasn't "inadvertently or perhaps knowingly" on your part! 

that the southwest of Sweden was being refered to

Did you mean "referred" to?
You want to teach me how to spell? You must be out of your mind!

whether you write it as 'Qur'an' or 'Muslim', you're still using the same alphabets of the 'kufars' who wrote it as 'Koran' and 'Moslem' - they're all written in English alphabets

Blooper! Boy, have you ever heard of Indo-Arabic? Were you ever thought about the Arabic numerals? Your so-called "English alphabets" did not originate in England. Study more, school boy.