American Muslims Are Now More Accepting Of Homosexuality Than White Evangelicals

Thirza Fallen said:

America invented Christian fundamentalism and Muslims that move here are generally more moderate than those in the Middle East.

Click to expand...

That's because you don't understand what Muslims are about.

In general your post is just full of completely irrelevant details that have no connection to what we are discussing: taqiyya.

shmogie said:

apparently you haven't read the foundational documents, of say, the moslem brotherhood,

Click to expand...

The MB tries to get people into positions of influence, sure. They might even do so dishonestly. So do fundamentalist Christians, white supremacists, communists, and all kinds of other groups.

shmogie said:

I don't promote a version of taqiyya, I say it exist's in the moslem world, two very different concepts.

Click to expand...

So the tl;dr is you have no evidence it exists as a mainstream belief, you just sort of assume it does because people said so on the internet and the internet is always correct.


Taḳiyya

(a.), also tuḳa n , tuḳāt , taḳwā and ittiḳāʾ , “prudence, fear” ... denotes dispensing with the ordinances of religion in cases of constraint and when there is a possibility of harm...

l-Ṭabarī says on sūra XVI, 108 ( Tafsīr , Būlāḳ 1323, xxiv, 122): “If any one is compelled and professes unbelief with his tongue, while his heart contradicts him, in order to escape his enemies, no blame falls on him, because God takes his servants as their hearts believe”...

but an independent individual is not justified in taḳiyya or bound to hid̲j̲ra, if the compulsion remains within endurable limits, as in the case of temporary imprisonment or flogging which does not result in death...

The moral dangers of taḳiyya are considerable, but it may be compared with similar phenomena in other religions and even among the mystics. The ethical question whether such forced lies and denials of the faith are not still lies and denials of the faith, is not put at all by the one “who conceals his real views”, as he is not in a state of confidence which would be broken by lies or denial.

(Encyclopedia of islam vol. 2)

shmogie said:

Now, before you spout the liberal line " that is just a small number", you need to familiarize yourself with the plethora of polls taken of American moslems. The percentage that want criticism of ol' mo made a crime, the percentage that believe that forced FGM is appropriate, the percentage that want sharia in their communities, the percentage that want it legal to marry children that American law makesillegal, all of it. Reputable reliable polls by reputable polling agencies.

Click to expand...

But surely they are just lying to the infidels as you claim is their duty

Evangelicalhumanist said:

No, you are telling it like somebody else wrote it.

Job is the second worst book in the Bible (Revelation taking the bottom). First of all, it's clearly an amalgam (Elihu who?), but most importantly, why on earth would anybody love and respect a god who allowed all of Job's children to be killed, and then thought he could "make up for it" by giving him some more? What a load of rubbish!

You want a good book in the Bible? Try Ecclesiastes. There's more truth in that one book than all the others put together.

Click to expand...

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

Faithofchristian said:

Seth took a wife, and Cain took a wife. According to Adams genealogy family tree, Adam and Eve did not have any daughters.

So where did Seth and Cain's wife's come from ? The only logical answer to this is that there were other males and females. Before Adam and Eve.

Those other males and females is where Seth and Cain took their wives from.

That's common sense.

Click to expand...

I hate to be the one to have to break this to you but:

Gen. 5:4
After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.

Not sure who is teaching you but you need a better Bible instructor. It is a good idea to read the entire Bible at least once in your lifetime so you are familiar with all of what it says. It makes it much more difficult for someone to tell you something is or isn't there when you've seen all of what's there at least once.

God bless you..

Thirza Fallen said:

Not sure daughters were recognized unless it was pertinent to the story. They seldom got mention.[/QUOTE

That's a trick of pastors,preachers, when a pastor can not answer a question, they will come with some bogus answer just to make themselves look

Click to expand...

DavidFirth said:

I hate to be the one to have to break this to you but:

Gen. 5:4
After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.

Not sure who is teaching you but you need a better Bible instructor. It is a good idea to read the entire Bible at least once in your lifetime so you are familiar with all of what it says. It makes it much more difficult for someone to tell you something is or isn't there when you've seen all of what's there at least once.

God bless you..

Click to expand...

As I hate to break it to you, but that of Genesis 5:4 is not about Adam, But Seth had sons and daughters.

The verse says And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters"

Notice that the days of Adam after Seth was born, were eight hundred years have passed since the day Adam was created.

And he ( Seth ) had sons and daughters.
Not Adam, But Seth had sons and daughters.

You need to take it slow when reading verse 4 it's very plain to see, that it was Seth who had sons and daughters. And Not Adam.

DavidFirth said:

I hate to be the one to have to break this to you but:

Gen. 5:4
After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.

Not sure who is teaching you but you need a better Bible instructor. It is a good idea to read the entire Bible at least once in your lifetime so you are familiar with all of what it says. It makes it much more difficult for someone to tell you something is or isn't there when you've seen all of what's there at least once.

God bless you..

Click to expand...

Right there is your whole Problem, listing to man and his teachings, Why do you rely on man's teachings, and not on God and his teachings.Have you not read, that how the teachings of man's makes the word of God void.

Look what Jesus has said about the teachings of man's in Matthew 15:7-9
Verses 7-9--"You hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you,saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips: but their heart is far from me, But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men"

Now do you get the picture. According to what Christ has said here, is that if you teach what man has taught you, then your worship to him is vain.meaning no good.

This means that man's teachings will never line up to what God has said in his word.
And that's evidence
Man's teachings will tell you that it was Adam who had sons and daughters, When in fact it was Seth who had sons and daughters, And not Adam.

shmogie said:

So, in other words, prejudice is pre judging and forming an opinion based upon that judgement. I have already said I will not go to a homosexual wedding because of religious conviction. This is based upon a judgement made by Paul, almost 2,000 years ago. Marriage is to be between one man and one woman only, anything else is religiously illegitimate. I am just following instructions.

As to the gaystopo , this is a generalized term referring to particularly abusive and/or viloent homosexuals or their supporters. An example of their activities from a couple of years ago will suffice, A reporter returning to Chicago stopped in a pizza restaurant in a small town. Seeing a cross on the wall, the reporter asked the woman in attendance if she was a Christian. The woman said yes. The reporter asked if the woman would serve homosexuals, she said she would. She was then asked if she would cater a homosexual wedding. The woman said her religion would prohibit her from doing so. This was a small family owned business that did not cater. The reporter wrote an article on the conversation in a Chicago paper. The restaurant was inundated with hate phone calls and death threats. Homosexuals arrived to harass customers and block the entrance to the restaurant. A chicago lesbian attempted to recruit others to help her burn down the business. THIS is the gaystopo at work, completely documented

Click to expand...

Is that what you're talking about?

Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizza Parlor Raises $842,592 From Supporters

Faithofchristian said:

Seth took a wife, and Cain took a wife. According to Adams genealogy family tree, Adam and Eve did not have any daughters.

So where did Seth and Cain's wife's come from ? The only logical answer to this is that there were other males and females. Before Adam and Eve.

Those other males and females is where Seth and Cain took their wives from.

That's common sense.

Click to expand...

There's another logical answer available: The story never actually happened.

SkepticThinker said:

Is that what you're talking about?

Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizza Parlor Raises $842,592 From Supporters

Click to expand...

That's great ! Could be, I am not familiar with that part of the country, so someone heading to Chicago could certainly pass through Indiana. "No gay wedding pizza parlor". Well, the question was posed as a hypothetical about catering a homosexual wedding. This place never did, and doesn't cater anything. Therefore, the title is totally bogus meant to stir up the gaystopo.

Augustus said:

In general your post is just full of completely irrelevant details that have no connection to what we are discussing: taqiyya.




The MB tries to get people into positions of influence, sure. They might even do so dishonestly. So do fundamentalist Christians, white supremacists, communists, and all kinds of other groups.



So the tl;dr is you have no evidence it exists as a mainstream belief, you just sort of assume it does because people said so on the internet and the internet is always correct.


Taḳiyya

(a.), also tuḳa n , tuḳāt , taḳwā and ittiḳāʾ , “prudence, fear” ... denotes dispensing with the ordinances of religion in cases of constraint and when there is a possibility of harm...

l-Ṭabarī says on sūra XVI, 108 ( Tafsīr , Būlāḳ 1323, xxiv, 122): “If any one is compelled and professes unbelief with his tongue, while his heart contradicts him, in order to escape his enemies, no blame falls on him, because God takes his servants as their hearts believe”...

but an independent individual is not justified in taḳiyya or bound to hid̲j̲ra, if the compulsion remains within endurable limits, as in the case of temporary imprisonment or flogging which does not result in death...

The moral dangers of taḳiyya are considerable, but it may be compared with similar phenomena in other religions and even among the mystics. The ethical question whether such forced lies and denials of the faith are not still lies and denials of the faith, is not put at all by the one “who conceals his real views”, as he is not in a state of confidence which would be broken by lies or denial.

(Encyclopedia of islam vol. 2)




But surely they are just lying to the infidels as you claim is their duty

Click to expand...

I have told you, and showed that I know the classical definition of taqiyya. That is not the point. The point is that it has morphed into acceptable lying for any reason to the infidel by many moslems. Yes, if the polls weren't anonymous, most would lie.

Augustus said:

In general your post is just full of completely irrelevant details that have no connection to what we are discussing: taqiyya.




The MB tries to get people into positions of influence, sure. They might even do so dishonestly. So do fundamentalist Christians, white supremacists, communists, and all kinds of other groups.



So the tl;dr is you have no evidence it exists as a mainstream belief, you just sort of assume it does because people said so on the internet and the internet is always correct.


Taḳiyya

(a.), also tuḳa n , tuḳāt , taḳwā and ittiḳāʾ , “prudence, fear” ... denotes dispensing with the ordinances of religion in cases of constraint and when there is a possibility of harm...

l-Ṭabarī says on sūra XVI, 108 ( Tafsīr , Būlāḳ 1323, xxiv, 122): “If any one is compelled and professes unbelief with his tongue, while his heart contradicts him, in order to escape his enemies, no blame falls on him, because God takes his servants as their hearts believe”...

but an independent individual is not justified in taḳiyya or bound to hid̲j̲ra, if the compulsion remains within endurable limits, as in the case of temporary imprisonment or flogging which does not result in death...

The moral dangers of taḳiyya are considerable, but it may be compared with similar phenomena in other religions and even among the mystics. The ethical question whether such forced lies and denials of the faith are not still lies and denials of the faith, is not put at all by the one “who conceals his real views”, as he is not in a state of confidence which would be broken by lies or denial.

(Encyclopedia of islam vol. 2)




But surely they are just lying to the infidels as you claim is their duty

Click to expand...

Augustus said:

In general your post is just full of completely irrelevant details that have no connection to what we are discussing: taqiyya.




The MB tries to get people into positions of influence, sure. They might even do so dishonestly. So do fundamentalist Christians, white supremacists, communists, and all kinds of other groups.



So the tl;dr is you have no evidence it exists as a mainstream belief, you just sort of assume it does because people said so on the internet and the internet is always correct.


Taḳiyya

(a.), also tuḳa n , tuḳāt , taḳwā and ittiḳāʾ , “prudence, fear” ... denotes dispensing with the ordinances of religion in cases of constraint and when there is a possibility of harm...

l-Ṭabarī says on sūra XVI, 108 ( Tafsīr , Būlāḳ 1323, xxiv, 122): “If any one is compelled and professes unbelief with his tongue, while his heart contradicts him, in order to escape his enemies, no blame falls on him, because God takes his servants as their hearts believe”...

but an independent individual is not justified in taḳiyya or bound to hid̲j̲ra, if the compulsion remains within endurable limits, as in the case of temporary imprisonment or flogging which does not result in death...

The moral dangers of taḳiyya are considerable, but it may be compared with similar phenomena in other religions and even among the mystics. The ethical question whether such forced lies and denials of the faith are not still lies and denials of the faith, is not put at all by the one “who conceals his real views”, as he is not in a state of confidence which would be broken by lies or denial.

(Encyclopedia of islam vol. 2)




But surely they are just lying to the infidels as you claim is their duty

Click to expand...

Quran (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means 'deceit'. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same.

shmogie said:

That's great ! Could be, I am not familiar with that part of the country, so someone heading to Chicago could certainly pass through Indiana. "No gay wedding pizza parlor". Well, the question was posed as a hypothetical about catering a homosexual wedding. This place never did, and doesn't cater anything. Therefore, the title is totally bogus meant to stir up the gaystopo.

Click to expand...

The owner of the restaurant did actually say, "If a gay couple came in and wanted us to provide pizzas for their wedding, we would have to say no. We are a Christian establishment." She said it. So the title is not actually misleading. What she should have said instead was, "we don't provide catering services."

Then they made $842,592 through a GoFundMe campaign. So it sounds like they're doing alright despite the horrible, awful "gaystopo" trying to ruin their lives.

shmogie said:

I have told you, and showed that I know the classical definition of taqiyya. That is not the point.

Click to expand...

So you are saying the new version is an innovation and thus heretical to all good Salafis?

Interesting...

shmogie said:

The point is that it has morphed into acceptable lying for any reason to the infidel by many moslems.

Click to expand...

Yes, you've said the internet told you so it must be true.

shmogie said:

Yes, if the polls weren't anonymous, most would lie.

Click to expand...

Priceless

Literally anything 'proves' these devious Muslims are all out to get you. If they say something, or if they don't it just proves it all the more.

You know they're out to get you, but they are also so devious they can successfully hide it from you with their nefarious ways.

Can't beat a good bit of circular reasoning with legitimised confirmation bias.

ThePainefulTruth said:

Quran (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means 'deceit'. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same.

Click to expand...

And taqiyya is literally 'fear'.

Taḳiyya

(a.), also tuḳa n , tuḳāt , taḳwā and ittiḳāʾ , “prudence, fear” ... denotes dispensing with the ordinances of religion in cases of constraint and when there is a possibility of harm...

l-Ṭabarī says on sūra XVI, 108 ( Tafsīr , Būlāḳ 1323, xxiv, 122): “If any one is compelled and professes unbelief with his tongue, while his heart contradicts him, in order to escape his enemies, no blame falls on him, because God takes his servants as their hearts believe”...

but an independent individual is not justified in taḳiyya or bound to hid̲j̲ra, if the compulsion remains within endurable limits, as in the case of temporary imprisonment or flogging which does not result in death...

The moral dangers of taḳiyya are considerable, but it may be compared with similar phenomena in other religions and even among the mystics. The ethical question whether such forced lies and denials of the faith are not still lies and denials of the faith, is not put at all by the one “who conceals his real views”, as he is not in a state of confidence which would be broken by lies or denial.

(Encyclopedia of islam vol. 2)

But let's not let reality get in the way of a good yarn...

It is fortunate that we have educated people that have studied Islam in depth.

shmogie said:

Anyone who commits an act proscribed by Christianity, and says they are a Christian only makes them an alleged Christian.

Click to expand...

By this definition there are no Christians on Earth - only alleged Christians - because Christian theology teaches that all of us are sinners, and all of us incline toward sinful acts i.e. acts proscribed by Christianity. And since that definition of 'alleged Christians' would include you, I can dismiss what you say because as a non-Christian you are not in a position to lecture others on what Christianity is and is not. Hoisted by your own petard.

Christ said you would know true believers by their fruit (actions) not by what they say. ANYONE who says they are a Christian, and promotes murder of anyone for any reason, fails Christś test for inclusion in the body of Christ.

Click to expand...

So basically anybody who fails to live up to Christ's standards cannot be a Christian. Again, by your own religion's theology, that means nobody can be a Christian. You're also forgetting that Christianity is more than the sum of sayings attributed to Jesus by others - it also consists of Pauline doctrine. And Paul gave his share of homophobic verses too:

1. Romans 1:26-28;
2. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11;
3. 1 Timothy:8-10;

That's just a start.

There is no such thing as Christian homophobia, only non Christian homophobia.

Click to expand...

Sorry but your attempts to disown the problem don't wash. Christians have been using scriptural interpretations (Leviticus; claims that Jesus promoted mixed-sex marriage etc) and various theological angles (homosexuality is a symptom of our Fallen, sinful nature etc) to promote homophobia for millennia. You can't just brush that or any of the resulting homophobic actions under the carpet because you don't want to admit you're part of a belief system that still uses these justifications among others (such as falsely conflating gay people with child molesters (which coming from groups like the Catholic Church and some Evangelical ministers just screams of projection)) to treat LGBT people like second-class citizens. In every single Western country that has attempted to grant equal marriage rights under law to LGBTs; the campaigns to deny them these rights have been spear-headed by Christians spouting the Bible and Christian theology as arguments.

Finally, your attempts to disown Christian homophobia look quite hypocritical since you don't grant Muslims the same courtesy in respect to problems with Islam.

shmogie said:

No surprise, you missed the entire purpose of the Book of Job. An ämalgam, really ? all you have to do is prove it, please feel free to proceed. The book is about Gods sovereignty, the steadfastness of true faith, and that in the end, those that hold that faith will be victorious. God didnt think he could ¨ make up for it¨, both God and Job knew his dead children were just fine, and would be restored to him. His second family was a bonus. Of course, to you Revelation would be impossible to discern. You are singularly unqualified to do so. It wasnt meant for you to grasp. You are trying to read and understand something written in a language you dont know.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I do not believe that I missed the point -- in fact I think that you did. Job is clearly an allegory (and one which has been added to, which is easily seen and one which a large majority of scholars agree -- especially the sudden, inexplicable appearance of Elihu with an entirely different message than what has so far been the dialogues of Job's friends who are mentioned in the prologue -- Elihu is not). Further, the "voice in the whirlwind" is also clearly a later addition -- also much agreed by scholars. And it explains nothing except "I'm god and I'm wonderful and you're not, so shut up!"

In my view, Job is an attempt at a "theodicy," or an explanation of what we call "the problem of evil." And as such, in my view, it fails utterly for two reasons:

1. Job, as written, posits that there is evil in the world because God is so freakin' great that he can do what he wants and you're not up to understanding it anyway, no matter how it hurts -- so suck it up, loser, and
2. God -- in what I can only call a sheepish mea culpa contrives to make it all up to Job by giving him more children and even more wealth -- without ever actually saying "Sorry!"

As to your point about "God and Job knew his dead children were just fine, and would be restored to him" (which, although you don't say it we must assume you mean to be when he's dead and buried), I have this to say -- if it's that good, everybody should kill their children so they can start enjoying all those heavenly benefits sooner, rather than having to put up with school, bullying, acne, the pain of first love and all the other crap that "the problem of evil" never does manage to explain.

I find that comment of yours to be repulsive, on that basis.

DavidFirth said:

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

Click to expand...

Yes, I've heard that. But since scripture says if you want somebody else's land, you should kill all their men, women and boys and keep their virgin girls for yourself, I have just a slight problem with the notion that it teaches anything that I, personally, might call "righteousness." You, of course, may disagree, and already be planning to take over your neighbour's house and young daughter after killing him, his wife and sons, just because you've been told that god is on your side, and you're better than them. .

Evangelicalhumanist said:

Yes, I've heard that. But since scripture says if you want somebody else's land, you should kill all their men, women and boys and keep their virgin girls for yourself, I have just a slight problem with the notion that it teaches anything that I, personally, might call "righteousness." You, of course, may disagree, and already be planning to take over your neighbour's house and young daughter after killing him, his wife and sons.

Click to expand...

Are you confused? God is the only One who can command Israel's armies to do those things. The LORD giveth and the LORD taketh away.

Jesus never gave any commands to kill. Instead He commands us to love our enemies, pray for them, feed them, etc.

DavidFirth said:

Are you confused? God is the only One who can command Israel's armies to do those things. The LORD giveth and the LORD taketh away.

Jesus never gave any commands to kill. Instead He commands us to love our enemies, pray for them, feed them, etc.

Click to expand...

But I thought Jesus is God? Not so? Do tell....