Tariq, you still are not learing the facts, but getting better

Submitted by Joe (United States), Feb 22, 2006 at 16:47

This is going to be a lot of rebuttal.

The Big Bang, I argue, is in the Bible, along with Darwinism, although the Bible is more concerned with the separation of the natural and supernatural world. The Qur'an is like a horoscope, so general, that perhaps it can be interpretted to hold it. However, I was talking about the Crusades as historical.

Western Roman Empire Fell in 410, Islam introduced in 622 anno domini. Therefore after Roman Empire. Byzantium around until 1453.

You admit in your next point that the Muslims attacked before the Byzantines attacked. The fact is, there armies were a needed buffer against the Huns, Monguls, (pre-Muslim conversion) Turks, and eventually against the mass build up of Muslims in the South. In any case, the Muslims decided to conquer and extend even further into Europe. Why did the Europeans fight so hard to get them out then? Because they were not wanted.

The first Crusade was political, even if initiated by Pope Urban II. Look it up, this is a historical fact contrary to popular culture. He wanted to spread influence in the area, only after asked by Alexis to do so. Search the Crusades: Crescent and Cross on the HistoryChannel.com to figure it out, or anywhere else.

Again you admit that the Muslims attacked first. The Byzantine empire was flourishing, and only faltered because of the constant onslaught of barbarians. Look at Constantinople and the Hagia Sophia. No one wanted the Muslims.

It is true the Spanish were oppressed, the Visigoths were a Germanic tribe that invaded the Iberian penn. after the fall of the Roman Empire. They were tyrannical conquerors. But why did the altruist Muslims overstay their welcome, as demonstrated by their expulsion in 1492? They obviously did something wrong. Perhaps the jizya was just as tryrannical as the employs of the Visigoths.

The fact is, medieval Islamic hospitality was perhaps hospitable for that time period to conquered peoples. But truly, it still had its faults and tyrannical backing.

You then admit that not paying the jizya would result in death, or loss of faith. This is more forceful coercion and tyranny. You tied the jizya to death and forced conversion. Biased taxation is wrong, and only demostrated Islamic bigotry, which you enjoy.

Booty and looting is stealing no matter how you label it, and no matter the rationalization. You are taking what is not yours and what was not given to you freely. Your acceptance of looting only futher demonstrates Islamic backward thought. I thought that there was "no compulsion in religon", more exceptions and contradictions.

Muslims could not exert their full influence in the Andulus and thus could not convert everyone by the sword. People there were devote Christians and would have all died rather than convert. Economically, it would not be feasible or desirable.

Jesus and the later Christians were persecuted by the Romans, and they did not run away to Medina or fight wars of religion against the Romans. Muhummad was a killer.

Old Testament
Do not commit murder. Deuteronomy 5:17 [1]
Do not commit murder. Exodus 20:12 [2]
[edit]
New Testament
...no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. (1 John 3:15)
murderers... shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. (Revelation 21:8)
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment. (Matthew 5:21)
Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill (Romans 13:9)
Listing sins: Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings (Galatians 5:21)
Listing sins: Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts. (Revelation 9:21)
Listing sins: murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars (Revelation 21:8)

Jesus corrected fallacies in the Old Testament that justified murder and things like stoning. "He who is without sin cast the first stone". Because none of us are without sin, none of us may kill, and because killing is a sin, it is impossible to do.

As for your encyclopedia quotes, I am sure you will find some regarding the tryanny of Islam during their Jihads, and even modern rule. Actually just look at the front page of the newspaper and you will see some terrorism. It is vanity to fight in the name of God, and so I do not agree with any Christians using God as a means to fight.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".