Islam is not bad, too many of you are ignorant of history.

[dib8rman]

Joelcool7 said:

Honestly SuperChunk your not winning your debate. Even if you can argue that the Qur'an is 100% peaceful you still say that theHadiths are not. You also say that the Hadiths dictate Islamic policies in all major Muslim countries as well as influence western Islam. Fact is these Hadiths are horrible texts in many cases and in modern Islam are accepted as Holy and even in some cases being added to the Qur'an.

Now what I would love to see, because I believe you are very passionate about your faith and the Qur'an as apparently peaceful. I would like to see you go on some Al-Qaida forum or other extremist forum and spread the light. I hate to use the term missionary as you'd be talking to fellow Muslim's but you claim to be so enlightened.

Infact even here you don't seem to have the support of the muslims of this board. I have not seen to many here backing you up and I do know your not the only one on VGChartz.

I noticed something big, at the beginning of my question as to how Muslims could believe the Bible is a Holy text but not follow its teachings. You said it was a Holy text and that the teachings of Jesus applied, however you said Jesus did not rise again after three days nor was he the son of God and their is no such thing as the trinity. Then I posted a few verses which you managed to explain using different interpretations. However when I qouted more verses you claimed that the Bible had been tainted by men.

Now if the Bible indeed has been tainted by men, how could it still be a Holy book? And if the Bible was tainted how about the Qur'an? You claim the Roman's influenced the translations of the Bible and made up the Trinity etc...etc... However I know that the origional Manuscripts still exist and know people who recently examined and helped translate them. Are you saying the romans took the origional manuscripts and altered them?

I'm not about to debate Christianity verses Islam and say your evil for believing different then me. Just pointing out your thinking is flawed. I personally know that the origional manuscripts still exist today. Does the origional Qur'an exist today? Is it still being studied and re-translated from time to time to ensure it remains accurate? From a quick google search it doesn't appear the origional manuscripts in which the Quran were based on exist today. Am I wrong? I could be as I just googled it quickly.

Anyways you didn't call us ignorant if we believe Islam is violent. But the Hadiths which you claim are core to modern Islam is very much so. So its not us being ignorant, even if the Qur'an itself is peaceful (Which is very debatable) the Hadiths certainly are not. Many of them I would consider evil, same with the Sharia as seen in Afghanistan and most of the other muslim countries. Things like women must be covered at all times, a Muslim cannot convert to Christianity or any other faith or he needs to be executed.

Islam in its modern day context is very violent and I would say border line evil. The small minority like yourself do not represent Islam as a whole and neither does the Qur'an. I notice your quick to say the Christian's were the same way. You mention the Crusades, but guess what your right Christianity was violent but it had nothing to do with the Bible. In the same way Islam is very violent and evil in its current form. Regardless of whether the Qur'an promotes that view or not.

I myself would be stoned to death or imprisoned for proselytizing if I went to almost any Muslim majority country. Any Muslim who converted would face similiar persecution. At the hands of who? Muslims!

Keep in mind that the new testament is most likely what he's arguing has been tainted, in other words the story of Jesus, But the falacy of monotheism or all theisms is that they declare their god true or at least greater than all other gods.

For example, Christians and Jews do this in their 10 commandments in commandment 1. The Muslims do this in virtually every other verse of the Qur'an. 

The point being that the OT or the Hebrew texts could be claimed if anything to be untainted by the Romans, if only a little. Luke, Paul, Peter, Matthew and so on each had at least some access to the manuscripts for the Old Testament and were writing the new one.

I know some religious fundamentalists who would explain to me that Revalations did happen already as described biblically in that it was the fall of Jerusilem to Rome.  (Because back then god was true to a god's nature and had an impact in War and Peace.)

However the Qur'an itself was never completed until 900 AD and by the Caliphate none the less.  There were originally 7 variations to the Qur'an from various sources and the Arabs back then got to pick which one they liked best. ^_^ Most Muslims I've met like either to deny or not explore that detail some even believe the disgustingly rich and powerful Muslims of back then were true and honorable enough to select the verses best representing Islam. The point is they selected which makes it not so Sacred and worse yet  from 7 variations to gods word.