|
Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
asterix
Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 1654
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:25 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
If you mean swords, k.m.m. what is your point?
Much of the Bible is history, and the sword was a weapon of those times.
There is a verse in the Koran referred to as, "The sword verse", and there are 164 verses about jihad, which is not a peaceful pastime.
I just don't think you can call Islam a peaceful religion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ad-miral
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 1488
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flying pig wrote: |
No, not at all.
It's one of the few, REAL, non-childish things left to argue about. |
take a look at for example asterix' post.
He said "I just don't believe Islam is a peaceful religion."
So, here is a fictive monologue:
-Terrorists made attacks on WTC and on Pentagon.
-These terrorists are also religious.
-They believe in Islam.
-Islam is not a peaceful religion.
From my very personal point of view this is childish.
_________________
If I say "I love you" to someone, then I also have to say "I also love everyone else inside you, I love the whole world because of you, I also love myself inside you." -- Erich Fromm, the Art of Love |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flying_pig319
Joined: 01 Jul 2006
Posts: 369
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="ad-miral"]
| flying pig wrote: |
No, not at all.
It's one of the few, REAL, non-childish things left to argue about. |
take a look at for example asterix' post.
He said "I just don't believe Islam is a peaceful religion."
So, here is a fictive monologue:
-Terrorists made attacks on WTC and on Pentagon.
-These terrorists are also religious.
-They believe in Islam.
-Islam is not a peaceful religion.
From my very personal point of view this is childish.[/quote
I agree with asterix- my previous post was discussing the Islam-peacefulness issue as well.
I don't see why the monologue is childish, sorry.
_________________
peace-monger |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anuradha Chepur
Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 933
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
FP writes
| Quote: |
| I have to disagree with you. Islam had an entire empire! Do you think they got all that land by simply asking for it? Islam has been very forceful in history- and now! |
Take for instance India. The Aryans and the Dravidians (both hindus) were living here, and India was very prosperous and quite peaceful. Mohammad Gazni/Ghori invaded 18 times in the 12th Century, and broke all the temples in the present day Gujarat, including the Somnath temple. Slowly they established their empire. Initially they were violent and converted people by the sword and by marrying war widows, and taxed the non-muslims. The later mughal emperors in chronological order were Babur, Humayun, Akbar, Jehangir, Shah Jahan (who constructed the Taj Mahal) and Aurangzeb. Of course, Akbar was sensible and even secular. He removed the Zizziya tax, married a rajput princess and even founded a religion called Din-e-Ilahi, which was based on the good things from all religions. Except Auranzeb, who was very rude, we got to read nice things at school about the other five emperors, though. The Marathas resisted Aurangzeb and other tyrants.
http://www.geocities.com/narenp/history/history/fighters.htm
But now I feel thankful for British colonization, which ultimatley led to freedom and formation of a secular state. Otherwise maybe India would have been a muslim state, under some lousy mulsim dictator, who knows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flying_pig319
Joined: 01 Jul 2006
Posts: 369
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 3:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Anuradha Chepur wrote: |
FP writes
| Quote: |
| I have to disagree with you. Islam had an entire empire! Do you think they got all that land by simply asking for it? Islam has been very forceful in history- and now! |
Take for instance India. The Aryans and the Dravidians (both hindus) were living here, and India was very prosperous and quite peaceful. Mohammad Gazni/Ghori invaded 18 times in the 12th Century, and broke all the temples in the present day Gujarat, including the Somnath temple. Slowly they established their empire. Initially they were violent and converted people by the sword and by marrying war widows, and taxed the non-muslims. The later mughal emperors in chronological order were Babur, Humayun, Akbar, Jehangir, Shah Jahan (who constructed the Taj Mahal) and Aurangzeb. Of course, Akbar was sensible and even secular. He removed the Zizziya tax, married a rajput princess and even founded a religion called Din-e-Ilahi, which was based on the good things from all religions. Except Auranzeb, who was very rude, we got to read nice things at school about the other five emperors, though. The Marathas resisted Aurangzeb and other tyrants.
|
The Mughals! I did a school report on them last year!
VERY interesting how some of them were more progressive and wanted the Muslims and Hindus to get along peacefully (Akbar) and some definitely did not.
And one guy, I remember, had his wife do all of his work because he was so bad at it. Seems like women have been superior throughout history!  
_________________
peace-monger |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anuradha Chepur
Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 933
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
FP wrote
| Quote: |
| The Mughals! I did a school report on them last year! |
Indian history in American schools? I didn't know that.
| Quote: |
| And one guy, I remember, had his wife do all of his work because he was so bad at it. Seems like women have been superior throughout history! |
Yes, this one was Jehangir. He was into sensual pleasures all the time , and his queen Noor Jehan, a very ambitious lady, did his work.
Akbar, on the other hand, was peaceful and diplomatic. He used to expand his empire by marrying princesses from various kingdoms. I read he had 300 wives. He even got into trouble with the muslim law which allows only four wives.
Akbar is glorified in our history. Ask anyone in India who their favourite historical figure is, most of them would say Akbar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zeh88
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 33
Location: pakistan
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:09 am Post subject: dravdions and aryans |
|
|
come on, i also have done some research on histories. aryans always abused dravidian only for being dark and short. secondly, islamic history.... what about your stupid SATTe system banned by mohammed bin qasim? and more? what about prohet muhammed's conquest of makkah without any blood shed.. and the general amnesty granted to all. thats pretty violent isnt it? you just dont want to agree just say that!.
being under british huh? well it must be very relishing to remind you of amritsar tragedy!? still want brithish????? thats very pretentious!
_________________
go the last mile_ and enjoy it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pugachevV
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Posts: 2295
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here you go again admiral...
If you are going to quote asterix, why don't you quote him correctly? He said
| Quote: |
| I just don't think you can call Islam a peaceful religion. |
Thinking is not the same as believing and he did mention some reasons from koran why he thought that way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ad-miral
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 1488
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
The problem is not the religion! The problem is the thinking that Christianism is the opponent of the Islam.
_________________
If I say "I love you" to someone, then I also have to say "I also love everyone else inside you, I love the whole world because of you, I also love myself inside you." -- Erich Fromm, the Art of Love |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flying_pig319
Joined: 01 Jul 2006
Posts: 369
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ad-miral wrote: |
| The problem is not the religion! The problem is the thinking that Christianism is the opponent of the Islam. |
ChristianITY.
And I disagree.
They may be a little different, but they're not opponents- that makes it sound like a boxing match!
| Anuradha Chepur wrote: |
FP wrote
| Quote: |
| The Mughals! I did a school report on them last year! |
Indian history in American schools? I didn't know that. |
Yeah- we learn every place's history.
There's actually a big focus on India because it had some very early civilizations, which I'm sure you knew (Gupta and things), so we learn about those when we learn about the earliest civilizations (along with the Mesopotamian civilizations and Egyptian ones and Sumerian ones).
| Anuradha Chepur wrote: |
| Yes, this one was Jehangir. He was into sensual pleasures all the time , and his queen Noor Jehan, a very ambitious lady, did his work. |
Wow-- ahead of her time!
Hooray for ambitious women!
| Anuradha Chepur wrote: |
Akbar, on the other hand, was peaceful and diplomatic. He used to expand his empire by marrying princesses from various kingdoms. I read he had 300 wives. He even got into trouble with the muslim law which allows only four wives.
Akbar is glorified in our history. Ask anyone in India who their favourite historical figure is, most of them would say Akbar. |
That's really great- I wish I lived in a nation with a more ancient history.
_________________
peace-monger |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ad-miral
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 1488
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flying_pig319 wrote: |
ChristianITY.
And I disagree.
They may be a little different, but they're not opponents- that makes it sound like a boxing match! |
Thanks for the correction.
But if you look at the news: Match: Muslim Al Qaida/ Iran (muslim)/ Iraq (muslim)/Ahmadinedschad against Pope/ Europe/ USA/ NATO...
| fp319 wrote: |
| There's actually a big focus on India because it had some very early civilizations, which I'm sure you knew (Gupta and things), so we learn about those when we learn about the earliest civilizations (along with the Mesopotamian civilizations and Egyptian ones and Sumerian ones). |
we have learned about India, too!
_________________
If I say "I love you" to someone, then I also have to say "I also love everyone else inside you, I love the whole world because of you, I also love myself inside you." -- Erich Fromm, the Art of Love |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flying_pig319
Joined: 01 Jul 2006
Posts: 369
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ad-miral wrote: |
| flying_pig319 wrote: |
ChristianITY.
And I disagree.
They may be a little different, but they're not opponents- that makes it sound like a boxing match! |
Thanks for the correction.
But if you look at the news: Match: Muslim Al Qaida/ Iran (muslim)/ Iraq (muslim)/Ahmadinedschad against Pope/ Europe/ USA/ NATO... |
But these conflicts are because of political decisions, not religious ones (for the most part).
Do you ever hear references made to Jesus or Mohammad when the leaders of these groups/countries are talking? No, because these are political, not religious.
Both religions (like most all religions) just want their followers to be nice, moral people, and the seperate rituals or holidays for different religions are just different ways of going about achieving this same goal of morality. At least, that's the way I see it.
| ad-miral wrote: |
| fp319 wrote: |
| There's actually a big focus on India because it had some very early civilizations, which I'm sure you knew (Gupta and things), so we learn about those when we learn about the earliest civilizations (along with the Mesopotamian civilizations and Egyptian ones and Sumerian ones). |
we have learned about India, too! |
Heheh, cool!
_________________
peace-monger |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anuradha Chepur
Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 933
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
zeh88 wrote
| Quote: |
| come on, i also have done some research on histories |
Good.
| Quote: |
| aryans always abused dravidian only for being dark and short. |
May be, but that�s beside the point. It�s not time to change the topic yet.
| Quote: |
| what about your stupid SATTe system banned by mohammed bin qasim? |
It was the likes of Akbar who tried to stop sati, but ultimately it was Governor General Bentick who banned sati in 1829.
| Quote: |
| what about prohet muhammed's conquest of makkah without any blood shed.. and the general amnesty granted to all. thats pretty violent isnt it? you just dont want to agree just say that!. |
I�m not talking about prophet Mohammad and unless I read up, I can�t say anything. I�m into muslim invasions on India, anyway,
| Quote: |
| being under british huh? well it must be very relishing to remind you of amritsar tragedy!? still want brithish????? thats very pretentious! |
Well, I never described British rule, and I don�t mean that the British were our saviours. Just as some of the mughals were progressive, so were some of the British, who were rather humane and friendly. We can�t deny that British rule initiated us into modernization.
After thousand years of invasion (from 709 -1707), the muslim invaders were not successful in wiping out hindusism, which means our guys were tough nuts. Ultimately, the Marathas put them in place. After Aurangzeb, there wasn't much of muslim rule left anyway. Then came in the British. All I meant was, whatever the turn of events, ultimately lead to democracy and thwarted any remote chance of the country being taken over by a muslim dictator.
For more than twelve hundred years, India, which was once a rich empire, was abused by invaders. It�s now only sixty years since we are independent, and even now the illiterate/corrupt politicians are abusing the country. To add to this, border disputes increase our defense expenditure (1/10th of India�s budget is for defense). Inspite, the country is pulling up its socks. There are educated leaders too. You might know that we have a muslim president, Abdul Kalam, who is the darling of the nation. He has a vision to make India a superpower by 2020. So you see, there is a lot of difference between a muslim dictator and a muslim president in a democracy.
But you guys are fortunate too, President Musharraf is progressive (and good looking). Many Indians like him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anuradha Chepur
Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 933
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
FP wrote
| Quote: |
Yeah- we learn every place's history.
There's actually a big focus on India because it had some very early civilizations, which I'm sure you knew (Gupta and things), so we learn about those when we learn about the earliest civilizations (along with the Mesopotamian civilizations and Egyptian ones and Sumerian ones). |
In my day, we only had Indian history in school. I checked the present school texts, they have a bit of American history - the freedom thing.
But my father, who is fond of giving lectures on general knowldege, used to tell me about Mayans, Aztecs, Normans, Saxons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zeh88
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 33
Location: pakistan
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:29 am Post subject: peace |
|
|
hi anuradha,
for your correction, i still say it was mohammed bin qasin who put an end to sati and cast system. it might be possible that some hindus were still practising it secretly and then bennitik showed up. so it was muhammed bin qasim who brought the awareness.
i dont know , people say we respect each others religion but still they end up saying "islam -kill,unpeaceful,and so on...
peace with you all,
regards
_________________
go the last mile_ and enjoy it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
