  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 The Evangelical RebellionPosted on Dec 23, 2007
By Chris Hedges The rise of Mike Huckabee as a presidential candidate represents a seismic shift in the tactics, ideology and direction of the radical Christian right. Huckabee may stumble and falter in later primaries, but his right-wing Christian populism is here to stay. Huckabee represents a new and potent force in American politics, and the neocons and corporate elite, who once viewed the yahoos of the Christian right as the useful idiots, are now confronted with the fact that they themselves are the ones who have been taken for a ride. Members of the Christian right, recruited into the Republican Party and manipulated to vote against their own interests around the issues of abortion and family values, are in rebellion. They are taking the party into new, uncharted territory. And they presage, especially with looming economic turmoil, the rise of a mass movement that could demolish what is left of American democracy and set the stage for a Christian fascism. The corporate establishment, whose plundering of the country created fertile ground for a radical, right-wing backlash, is sounding the alarm bells. It is scrambling to bolster Mitt Romney, who, like Rudy Giuliani or Hillary Clinton, will continue to slash and burn on behalf of corporate profits. Columnist George Will called Huckabee’s populism “a comprehensive apostasy against core Republican beliefs.” He wrote that Huckabee’s candidacy “broadly repudiates core Republican policies such as free trade, low taxes, the essential legitimacy of America’s corporate entities and the market system allocating wealth and opportunity.” National Review’s Rich Lowry wrote that “like [Howard] Dean, his nomination would represent an act of suicide by his party.” Huckabee spoke of this revolt on the “Today” show. “There’s a sense in which all these years the evangelicals have been treated very kindly by the Republican Party,” he said. “They wanted us to be a part of it. And then one day one of us actually runs and they say, ‘Oh, my gosh, now they’re serious.’ They [evangelicals] don’t want to just show up and vote, they actually would want to be a part of the discussion.” George Bush is a happy stooge of his corporate handlers. He blithely enriches the oligarchy, defends a war that is the worst foreign policy blunder in American history and callously denies medical benefits to children. Huckabee is different. He has tapped into the rage and fury of the working class, dispossessed and abandoned by the mainstream Democrats and Republicans. And he refuses to make the ideology of the Christian right, with its dark contempt for democratic traditions and intolerance of nonbelievers, a handmaiden of the corporate establishment. This makes him a much more lethal and radical political force. The Christian right is the most potent and dangerous mass movement in American history. It has been controlled and led, until now, by those who submit to the demands of the corporate state. But the grass roots are tired of being taken for rubes. They are tired of candidates, like Bush or Bill Clinton, who roll out the same clichés about working men and women every four years and then spend their terms enriching their corporate backers. The majority of American citizens have spent the last two decades watching their government services and benefits vanish. They have seen their jobs go overseas and are watching as their communities crumble and their houses are foreclosed. It is their kids who are in Iraq and Afghanistan. The old guard in the Christian right, the Pat Robertsons, who used their pulpits to deliver the votes of naive followers to the corporatists, is a spent force. Huckabee’s Christian populism represents the maturation of the movement. It signals the rise of a truly radical, even revolutionary force in American politics, of which Huckabee may be one of the tamer and less frightening examples. Hints of Huckabee’s bizarre worldview seep out now and then. Bob Vander Plaats, Huckabee’s Iowa campaign manager, for example, when asked about his candidate’s lack of foreign policy experience, told MSNBC: “Well, I think Gov. Huckabee has a lot of resources that he goes to on national security matters. Here’s a guy, a former pastor, who understands a theological nature of this war as we’re fighting a radical religion in Islam.” Robert Novak noted that Huckabee held a fundraiser last week at the Houston home of Dr. Steven Hotze. As Novak wrote, Hotze is “a leader in the highly conservative Christian Reconstruction movement.” Huckabee has close ties with the Christian Reconstructionist or Dominionist branch of the Christian right. The Dominionist movement, which seeks to cloak itself in the mantle of the Christian faith and American patriotism, is small in numbers but influential. It departs from traditional evangelicalism. It seeks to redefine traditional democratic and Christian terms and concepts to fit an ideology that calls on the radical church to take political power. It shares many prominent features with classical fascist movements, at least as such movements are defined by the scholar Robert O. Paxton, who sees fascism as “a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cultures of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.” Dominionism, born out of Christian Reconstructionism, seeks to politicize faith. It has, like all fascist movements, a belief in magic along with leadership adoration and a strident call for moral and physical supremacy of a master race, in this case American Christians. It also has, like fascist movements, an ill-defined and shifting set of beliefs, some of which contradict each other. Paxton argues that the best way to understand authentic fascist movements, which he says exist in all societies, including democracies, is to focus not on what they say but on how they act, for, as he writes, some of the ideas that underlie fascist movements “remain unstated and implicit in fascist public language” and “many of them belong more to the realm of visceral feelings than to the realm of reasoned propositions.” Dominionism teaches that American Christians have been mandated by God to make America a Christian state. A decades-long refusal by most American fundamentalists to engage in politics at all following the Scopes trial has been replaced by a call for Christian “dominion” over the nation and, eventually, over the Earth itself. Dominionism preaches that Jesus has called on Christians to actively build the kingdom of God on Earth. America becomes, in this militant Biblicism, an agent of God, and all political and intellectual opponents of America’s Christian leaders are viewed, quite simply, as agents of Satan. Under Christian dominion, America will no longer be a sinful and fallen nation but one in which the Ten Commandments form the basis of our legal system, in which creationism and “Christian values” form the basis of our educational system, and the media and the government proclaim the Good News to one and all. Labor unions, civil rights laws and public schools will be abolished. Women will be removed from the work force to stay at home, and all those deemed insufficiently Christian will be denied citizenship. Baptist minister Rick Scarborough, founder of Vision America and a self-described “Christocrat,” who attended the Texas fundraiser, has endorsed Huckabee. Scarborough, along with holding other bizarre stances, opposes the HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccine on grounds that it interferes with God’s punishment of sexual license. And Huckabee, who once advocated isolating AIDS patients from the general public and opposed increased federal funding in the search for a cure, comes out of this frightening mold. He justified his call to quarantine those with AIDS because they could “pose a dangerous public health risk.” “If the federal government is truly serious about doing something with the AIDS virus, we need to take steps that would isolate the carriers of this plague,” Huckabee wrote. “It is difficult to understand the public policy towards AIDS. It is the first time in the history of civilization in which the carriers of a genuine plague have not been isolated from the general population, and in which this deadly disease for which there is no cure is being treated as a civil rights issue instead of the true health crisis it represents.” Huckabee has publicly backed off from this extreme position, but he remains deeply hostile to gays. He has used wit and humor to deflect reporters from his radical views about marriage, abortion, damnation, biblical law, creationism and the holy war he believes we are fighting with Islam. But his stances represent a huge step, should they ever become policy, toward a theocratic state and the death of our open society. In the end, however, I do not blame Huckabee or the tens of millions of hapless Christians—40 percent of the Republican electorate—who hear his words and rejoice. I blame the corporate state, those who thought they could disempower and abuse the working class, rape the country, build a rapacious oligarchy and never pay a political price. Chris Hedges, who graduated from seminary at Harvard Divinity School, is the author of “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America.” Previous item: Banking on Grass Roots in Iowa Next item: The FCC's Christmas Gift to Big Media Elsewhere: . Comments: 775 Published. Add Yours?Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. |
A Slap in the Face
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
By Nabih Ammari, May 6 at 6:37 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re:Muhammad’s Achievements and Greatness continues…
The following quote comprises two parts,PART ONE:
Quote
======
Alphonse de Lamartine,Hitoire de la Turquie.
Never has a man set for himself,voluntarily or involuntarily a more subline aim,since this aim
superhuman to subvert superstitions which had been interposed between man and his creator,to render God unto man and man unto God,to restore the rational and sacred idea of divinity amidst the chaos of the material and disfigured God of idolatry,then existing.Never has a man undertaken a work so far beyond human power with so feeble means,for he(Muhammad)had in the conception as well as in the execution of such a great design no other instrument
than himself,and no other aid,except a handful of men
living in a corner of the desert.Finally,never has a man accomplished such a huge and lasting revolution in the world,because in less than two centuries after its appearance,Islam,in faith and in arms,
reigned over the whole of Arabia,and conquered,in God ‘s name,Persia,Khorasan,Transoxania,Western India,
Syria,Egypt,Abbassinia,all the known continent of
North Africa,numerous islands of the Mediterranean,
Spain,and a part of Gaul.
If greatness of purpose,small of means,and astounding
results are the true criteria of human genius,who
could dare to compare any great man in modern history
with Muhammad? The most famous men created arms,laws
and empires only.They founded,if anything at all,no more than material powers which often crumbled away
before their eyes.This man moved not only armies,
legislations,empires,peoples and dynasties,but millions of men in one-third of the inhabited world, and more than that,he moved the alters,the gods,the religions,the ideas,the beliefs and the soul.
To Be Continued in PART TWO.
Reply to this | Report this=============================
By Nabih Ammari, May 6 at 5:42 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re:Muhammad’s Achievements and Greatness continues…
The following quote comprises two parts,PART TWO:
Quote
=====
Alphonse de Lamartine,Histoire de la Turquie
On the basis of a Book,every letter of which has become law,he created a spiritual nationality which blended together peoples of every tongue and every
race.He has left us as the indelible characteristic
of this Muslim nationality the hatred of false God
and the passion for the One and immaterial God.This
avenging patriotism against the profanation of heaven
formed the virtue of the followers of Muhammad,the
conquest of one-third of the earth to his dogma was
his miracle,or rather it was not the miracle of a man
but that of reason.
The idea of the unity of God,proclaimed amidst the
exhaustion of fabulous theogonies,was in itself such
a miracle that its utterance from his lips it destroyed all the ancient temples of idols and set on
fire one-third of the world.His life,his meditation,
his heroic reliving against the superstitions of his
country,and his boldness in defying the furies of idolatry,his firmness in ending them for fifteen years at Mecca,his acceptance of the role of public
scorn and almost of being a victim of his fellow countrymen,all these and,finally,his flight,his incessant preaching,his was against odds,his faith in his success and his superhuman security in misfortune
his forbearance in victory,his ambition,which was entirely devoted to one idea and in no manner striving for an empire,his endless prayers,his mystic conversations with God,his death and his triumph after death,all these attest not to an imposture but
to affirm conviction which gave him the power to restore a dogma.This dogma was twofold,the unity of God and the immateriality of God;the former telling
what God is,the latter is telling what God is not,the
one overthrowing false Gods with the sword,the other
starting an idea with the words.
Philosopher,Orator,apostle,lagislator,warrior,conqueror
of ideas,restorer of rational dogmas of a cult without images,the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire,that is Muhammad.
As regards all standards by which human greatness may
be measured,we may well ask,is there any man greater
than he?-Paris 1845,Vol.ll.pp 276-277.
Unquote
=======
you may wish to add the above to your file on Islam.
Sincerely,
Reply to this | Report thisNabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio.
By Shenonymous, May 4 at 7:11 pm #
(868 comments total)
Thank you Nabih. I will add this last post of yours to the others. I have the 1st chapter of The History of God finished. It is slow going as I am squeezing my life into my life. So it goes. I hope I will soon be able to make some comments.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Nabih Ammari, May 4 at 4:51 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Subject:More on Muhammad’s Achievements and Greatness.
Dr. Michael H. Hart,author of “The 100:A Ranking of the
Most Influential Person in History”,writes:
Quote
=====
My choice of Muhammad to lead the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others,but he was the only man in
history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels
It may initially seem strange that Muhammad has been ranked higher than Jesus.There are two principal
reasons for that decision.First Muhammad played a far
important role to the development of Islam than Jesus
did in the development of Christianity.Although Jesus
was resposiblefor the main ethical and moral precepts
of Christianity(insofar as these different from Judaism) St.Paul was the main developer of Christian
theology,its principle proselytizer,and the author of
a large portion of the New Testament.
Muhammad,however,was responsible for both the theology of Islam and its main ethical and moral principles.In addition he played a kay role in proselytizing the new faith,and in establishing the
religious practices of Islam.Moreover,he is the author of the Muslim holy scriptures,the Koran{The
Qura’n,Muslims believe,is the revealed Word of God}.
Furthermore,Muhammad(unlike Jesus)was a secular leader as well as a religious leader.In fact,as the
driving force behind the Arab conquests,he may well
ranked as the most political leader of all time.{when
Muhammad died in 632,he was the effective leader of
all of southern Arabia.By 711,Arab armies had swept
completely North Africa to the Atlantic Ocean in a
scant century of fighting,the Bedouin tribesmen,
inspired by the word of the Prophet,had carved out an empire stretching from the borders of India to the
Atlantic Ocean-the largest empire that the world had
yet seen.}
The Arab conquests of the seventh century have continued to play an important role in human history,
down to the present day.It is this unparalleled
combination of secular and religious influence which
I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most
influential single figure in human history.
Unquote
=======
Perhaps,those who have already filed the 13 topics
Reply to this | Report thisseries I posted about Islam may wish to file all of the above also.
Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio
By Nabih Ammari, May 1 at 9:51 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re:A new day begins a new week April 28
Shenonymous,
What you are doing in order to understand Islam is the right path to follow.Just keep doing what you are doing and you will be successful in understanding Islam since you are approaching the subject matter with such an obvious open mind;biased to none;only to come CLOSE to the TRUTH.
Yes,Shenon,there are apparent contradictions in the
Qura’n,but they will become marginal as one fathoms
circumstance for which a particular verse appeared in the Qura’n.The following example may explain what I
mean;and then you are able to take it from there as
a contradiction appears to you:
(1)In the series of 13 topics about Islam,I mentioned
that the nomadic Arabs and the settlers Arabs,before
even Islam appeared,they were well aware of Jewish
Arab tribes and Christian Arab tribes in Arabia,who
worshiped a God described in a book.Hence,they called
them the “People of The Book”.This title or rather description remained as such after Islam appeared in
Arabia,in the 6TH century.The “People of The Book”
were mentioned in the Qura’n several times.In most of
the instances mentioned,Muslims were/are instructed
to never harm them and always respect them and make
sure to cooperate with them.Why in most,not all of them? Valid question.The answer is in (2) below:
(2)Please recall with me in the 13 series about Islam
Reply to this | Report thisI mentioned that there were in the town of Medina,
formerly called Yathrib,several Jewish Arab tribes.
One of them was called the tribe of Qaynuqa’.All Jewish and other tribes of Medina called Al-Ansar(the
supporters) who signed an accord with Muhammad.The only accord Muhammad ever signed in his entire life.
The Jewish tribe of Qaynuqa’ breached the accord by
making secret contacts and dealings with the most
powerful tribe in all Arabia,the Qurayish tribe in
Meccaa;and who wanted to kill Muhammad and all of his followers’.As the Qaynuqa’ deadly game was discovered
the other Jewish Arab tribes sided with Muhammad and
asked the Qaynuqa’ and their followers/supporters to
leave Medina.After some arguments,Qaynuqa’ left the
town.During this time of heated argumentation a verse
had appeared in which Muslims were instructed to be
alert/careful of those kind of “People of The Book”.In other words,Muslims were instructed to be careful as they dealt with the ilks of Qaynuqa.It happened that Qaynuqa’ was one tribe that had belonged to the “People ofTheBook”.Regrettably,unless one is quite familiar with all of the above,one can conclude that there is a contradiction,since in other places of the Qura’n the instructions were/are benevolent.
Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio
By Nabih Ammari, April 30 at 6:38 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re:Accessing the forum April 29
Shenonymous,
Yes,I clicked “Jump to Comment” and it worked so far
for page (1),and I could get page (2) of this thread.
Forget about getting pages(4),(5) and (6) and possibly (7).
By clicking “Jump to Comment”,I have NO idea whether
I am getting all the posts or not.Based on my experience in the past,if I did not click on “Arrange
comments by date”,some posts would remain hidden,
especially the ones which were responses to other posts.
Well,at least,I know now that my posts will appear on this thread,although I think that this thread has become over saturated,ready to stop by itself.However
Reply to this | Report thisI will try to post some posts before it reaches the
point of no return.Shenon,many many thanks.
Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari
An independent in Ohio.
By Nabih Ammari, April 29 at 5:11 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Subject:This thread might have been over-saturated!!!
This is to inform all of you that I can no longer get your posts on this thread.Each time I click “Arrange comments by date”,the screen of my computer turns into very black black.I had experienced exactly the same problem before at this very thread;and I believe either Senonymous or OzarkMichael or both had,somehow,fixed it with the site.I hope it can be done again this time.
I am not really sure whether or not you are going to get this message.I hope you will.
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisSincerely
Nabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio.
By Shenonymous, April 30 at 3:12 am #
(868 comments total)
Accessing the forum
Nabih, your post has shown up. Do not select Arrange comments by date. Just select Jump to comments that appears precisely after the article by Chris Hedges. See if that works. Contact me again through gmail to let me know if that works. If not we will try other avenues.
Reply to this | Report thisBy dreadnaught, April 28 at 3:36 pm #
(29 comments total)
notes in the margins
In chapter 1 of Armstrong’s “History of God” she writes that “when one religious idea ceases to work for them, it is simply replaced. These ideas disappear quietly, with no great fanfare, like the Sky God.”
1) I can’t help but notice, looking back through my history books, that most gods were “replaced” for these ancient civilizations by those who conquered them. Civilizations seldom stopped eating eachother or rising and falling long enough for Armstrong’s peaceful evolution. The Native Americans, for example, seemed perfectly happy with their own multitudinous gods before the conquistadores arrived. I’m not saying Armstrong’s simple replacement never happened! It just seems like she’s over… simplifying…
2) Which Sky God does she mean? At first this seems like an OCD Howard Hughes sort of question but it is very important. There were a multitude of Big Sky Gods and they did not all die quietly. Jupiter, the Native American Sky Father, Horus, Tian, Sheng Di, the list goes on. Perhaps she is talking about the overall Sky God of Engels and Bachofen? The pan-religious idea of the Big Daddy? I’d say that’s what she means. Reading further along she makes the case that all religions had little gods of places and things and draws other such parallels. So basically she is saying that it is all the same need/want and that religions around the world had to fill the same gaps for people in the same ways. Well, that makes a lot more sense and I can stop worrying about all these little ancient gods rising and falling so quickly. “Stop it, guys, you’re making me dizzy. It was an overall progression throughout the world.”
3) Then we come to the crux of the matter, which is that monotheism, according to Armstrong, was the next step in this progression. The One God crowds all the little gods out. The ancient Chinese god Shang Di, literally “The Lord Above,” became the Christian God when missionaries arrived in China. This seems logical but that isn’t exactly everybody progressing as much as it is one culture meddling with another, much the same as what happened to the Native Americans. If this really is a spiritual pandemic, a universal need, shouldn’t we all be progressing toward the same thing at pretty much the same pace as we evolve? Again I’m not saying she’s wrong, I’m just wondering. Maybe I just can’t see it? I mean… you could sort of say that Buddhism was Indo-China’s own Next Step… except that it is more like polytheism, with its multitudes of small gods, spirits, and Bodhisattvas.
4) I do not know whether Karen Armstrong was right or wrong about this whole thing, I’m puzzling her words out for myself as I go along, but any thoughts anybody wants to throw my way are certainly appreciated.
Reply to this | Report thisBy dreadnaught, April 28 at 2:34 pm #
(29 comments total)
while keeping a straight face
Thank you for agreeing to read my little story when it gets done, Shenonymous. If you are as “tough but fair” with me as you’ve been with Ms Armstrong, my writership will grow by leaps & bounds.
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisBy Shenonymous, April 28 at 2:41 pm #
(868 comments total)
Indubitably
With high expectations.
A wise old Chinese saying: Once a door is opened, life changes.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Shenonymous, April 28 at 10:18 am #
(868 comments total)
In defiance of the Italics Monster
Most of my time is being spent immersed in a plethora of literature on and thinking about Islam. Mind-boggling as that is and given that situation, I find I have questions and will take some time here to seek illumination. Since you recommended a protocol, Nabih, I have been reading Armstrong’s The History of God and as a history researcher myself I am running into some problems reading her style of writing. I do not doubt she has a wealth of knowledge on the topic we are discussing, and others as well I have discovered. That is not in question. It is how she presents her information in a kind of jumbled up way. I am presently working my way just through her Introduction as I have been taught that a strong foundation provides the correct basis for all other conclusions. As a scholar of Plato and many other great thinkers for more than 30 years, I have learned that writing must be meticulous if you want your ideas to hold up under scrutiny. Plato was the most economic writer in my experience who extolled the virtue of efficiency in writing and Aristotle said that good speeches are efficient communications. In works of art, and I am not saying that Armstrong is involved in making art, but nevertheless she is making artful propositions, nothing is accidental or extraneous. And a deliberate and concise path of exposition is required for a favorable critique. This is so the observer does not have to find their way through a labyrinth of thought. Words themselves are abstractions enough let alone trying to gain insight into another’s thought. So all this being said, I am asking for some help to get through Armstrong’s writings since you seem to have plumbed the depth of her thinking. I am finding within paragraphs she has written they are much too full of different ideas to string together cogently and at least in the section where I am, she does not give references. Questions are implicit and left hanging unresolved. I am convinced that she has a vast treasury of knowledge, it, however, looks to me that her ideas are not as clearly presented as they could be. As a teacher of critical thinking I have the credentials to say that. For instance, as an example, in the last sentence of the first paragraph of her Introduction to the text, I quote, “Since writing this book, however, I have come to believe that it is also incorrect.” What is unclear is exactly what it is “that is also incorrect?” Is it her statement that her own juvenile definition of God as “singularly arid, pompous and arrogant,” is incorrect, or, the catechismic description of “God as a Supreme Spirit who alone exists of Himself and is infinite in all perfections,” is incorrect? It is not definitely clear and that is the kind of glossing of many of her paragraphs. It is a lumpy way of getting through her exposition. I will make this intellectual journey, but I will need help for clarity sake. I feel I am an intelligent individual and well able to make sense of most of what I experience, but often one gains immeasurably with help. I think that is what we have been about pretty much on this thread, as Ozark has asked for and received much help, and actually has given it as well. So here I stand asking for help too in the face of esoteric knowledge that is claiming truth. I do indeed want to process through this topic towards understanding. But it must be in a coherent and logical way or else I think nothing will really be gained except more vague interpretation.
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisBy Shenonymous, April 28 at 10:19 am #
(868 comments total)
Intrepid
Another example that the content does not seem to follow within the sentences of a paragraph can be found on page xix of the paperback 1993 edition, in the paragraph that starts, “Yet my study of the history of religion has revealed that human beings are spiritual animals...” Here she is theorizing that humans “created religions” almost at once upon evolving into contemplative human form. This is a claim, but no evidence provided. It is not that I think she is wrong. She probably right. I just think a reference is needed. She is also saying that these religions were not created “simply because they wanted to propitiate powerful forces; these faiths expressed the wonder and mystery that seem always to have been an essential component of the human experience of this beautiful yet terrifying world. Like art, religion has been an attempt to find meaning and value in life, despite the suffering that flesh is heir to. Like any other human activity, religion can be abused, but it seems to have been something that we have always done. It was not tacked on to a primordially secular nature by manipulative kings and priests but was natural to humanity.” There is a contradiction lurking within these sentences. She says on the one hand that religion was not merely an invention to appease or conciliate some supernatural entity, but that the awesomeness of what these humans were experiencing is at the basis of religion. We must guess here she means the world as it was encountered, and here is where it gets semantically dicey. She says, “that was always to have been an essential component of the human experience...” but no evidence is given for this “always” status, no footnote of reference. No anthropological or archaeological evidence. She leaves it up to the novice of learning to find the source of this claim. So I, a meticulous historian of the ancient classic world, question the veracity of that conclusion. I do not think I am being too picky, although being picky is exactly the function of a good historian. We often must read between not only the lines but to guess the meaning of words! On the other hand, to finish my comparison, when she says “this beautiful yet terrifying world,” she is essentially saying that it was primarily to appease the supernatural. To my knowledge, wonder is not a strong enough emotion to instigate a coherent religion, nor is the perplexity of the mysterious. To make an overt behavior such as a religion evolve, primitive as it might be, would take the element of fear of the unknown. Or at least I could make that claim based on the same lack of evidence as Armstrong makes a case for the opposite.
Again, in making my case, she goes on to say, “...our current secularism is an entirely new experiment, unprecedented in human history....” But this is not true. There are many incidences of societies that evolved secular beliefs not in a supernatural being but rather believed in a philosophical system or way of life that emphasizes reason, ethics and justice and specifically rejects the supernatural. Secularism can be found in ancient Babylonian societies as well as in the culture of the ancient Greeks who were the first to question the validity of myth. The western mind gradually progressed away from superstitious religions with the greatest advance found in the humanism of the Renaissance.
I have given a few examples but nevertheless will continue on my quest through the mind of Karen Armstrong even though I have found these inconsistencies. I realize she offers a great deal of valuable historical information. I can do this because I am a trained historian, but I would caution the uninitiates working in historical research to check out all references even those not specifically given as referential because often a writer is not aware of what they have given themselves. I could only lead to more information, not necessarily discrediting Karen Armstrong. That is not my intention at all.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Shenonymous, April 28 at 8:59 am #
(868 comments total)
Promises promises
To the Italics Fixit Man (the IFM): Thanx. I’ll try my long posts now in less fear and trepidation of the Italics Monster. But we have our own specialist repairman watching, so I think I can walk a little less wobbly. So glad, sigh. Now you are sure this broken bone of italic interpolation won’t hurt? Ouch! I can only promise to be more careful.
Reply to this | Report thisBy OzarkMichael, April 28 at 8:43 am #
(170 comments total)
Ok, i am going to cause italics in the latests posts in order to flip the Italics in most of the older posts to straighten back out. Like breaking a bone to set it straight. I promise this wont hurt....
Reply to this | Report thisBy OzarkMichael, April 28 at 8:39 am #
(170 comments total)
Italics Repair
Hopefully this works yes?
Reply to this | Report thisBy OzarkMichael, April 28 at 8:38 am #
(170 comments total)
Italica
Shen , you have a way about you.
dreadnaught, hang in there.
Nabih, i am still reading posts.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Shenonymous, April 28 at 6:51 am #
(868 comments total)
One last time
One more time, then I quit.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Shenonymous, April 28 at 6:44 am #
(868 comments total)
Oops, somehow I forgot to close the italics. Yikes. See if I can do it with this post. [i[ . OM might have to come out of retirement to fix it for us. Oh my goodness.
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisBy Shenonymous, April 28 at 6:47 am #
(868 comments total)
Oh my goodness.
Trying again as it looks like the typo happened again! Yikes. . Let’s see. Otherwise, help, OM, help.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Shenonymous, April 28 at 6:41 am #
(868 comments total)
A new day begins a new week...
So glad you haven’t disappeared dreadnaught. The clarity and insightfulness of your good-natured comments are gladly received. I have found there are three ways to proceed through life: Hoping, trying, and doing.
On your quest for understanding Islam, you might take a similar path I am taking to grasp its particular qualities that has been at Nabih’s suggestion. Besides reading his generous presentation, I bought and have now watched several times, the epic film, The Message{/i]. Also, several books by the Islamist historian, Karen Armstrong, the first of which is The History of God that covers Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, a comparison that insight into the last created religion, Islam, would certainly require. A copy of the Qur’an, for a primary source, even though translated, which you might already have, seems a necessary beginning. And googling Islam and Mohammad will yield a treasure chest of subordinate literature, which is another way to fill up research time. But I am sure you already know this and may have gone this route as well. In my investigative travels I even found a site that lists contradictions found in the Qur’an. They do give morsels for thought but, as you must also know, they must be thoroughly questioned too. Since, and it is apparent, you are a very bright mind and could easily do all the inquiry methods I’ve listed, it seems you are seeking a more personal vision that Nabih can and is willing provide. But even if you are not, I am looking for this guidance as I feel in my western-educated mind as if I am in a dimly lit well of arcane knowledge.
Nabih, yes, there is something going on with Truthdig and their truncating the threads. It is not happening only on this one. I am finding it on other forums as well. Maybe they are running out of Internet space??? As I mentioned, I did write to the webmaster about your inability to get registered. He has not replied and he may not since I am referring to another member, you. I am posting a secondary email address here where you may contact me. It is a special email address where I may publish an avenue of contact and preserve my anonymity. I wish to tell you about the past comments and how you may get them. But this present arena is not a favorable forum, being too public, to reveal that information or my primary personal email address for obvious reasons, and I will tell you why in a private email. The address is if you wish to have this tome of comments.
I will be making a post that shall require two parts because of its length about my being absorbed in an expedition into Islam.
See y’all later....
Reply to this | Report thisBy dreadnaught, April 28 at 12:17 am #
(29 comments total)
so here we are
Hi all. I need to stop having bad days. Am grateful for your concern but am a little embarrased at causing it, Shenonymous, and hope not to in the future. I am still on my Quest to Understand Islam. Even though I am shy to the point of being neurotic I do not want to lose contact with you.
Nabih, at least one of the interruptions you’re casting up to OM was me. The thing about Mohammed & context, I’m sure you remember. It was a very loud interruption and I apologize. I just wanted to say Here I am and that seemed like a better way than yelling Ta-daa! and doing jazz hands, which is my way of getting people’s attention at work.
Such a pity about OM. He provided a counterpoint to a a Muslim-scholar-agnostic and a brilliant athiest. C’est la vie, adieu adieu.
So. Here we are. It is almost 1:30am here and I do not have enough time to ask a question or bring up an Islamic issue of my own. I will hang back for a beat and see what happens.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Nabih Ammari, April 27 at 10:11 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Subject:All posts of the 13 posts series…
Shenonymous,
This is to inform you that I had tried to review some
of the 13 topics of the series about Islam,on this
thread,I could not get any topic at all.As I clicked on 3,4 and 5,all I got “Add Your Comment” and completely blanks above it.I checked other threads to see if they had similar problem,they responded just fine;as they supposed to respond.The problem seems
so strange.I just do not know what to make of it.
My problem lies in the fact that I threw my notes away on the assumption that all the 13 topics would
always be available,as I need to consult them,on this
thread Of TruthDig.I made a terrible mistake by
throwing my written notes away.
From past experience,Truth-Dig will not respond to my
inquiries,regaldless how often I send inquiries.Will
you please try to find out what in the world is going
on from your side.They may respond to you.
I wish I could figure Truth-Dig’s ways of carrying
its daily business activities.At the moment,I just
do not know how long my patience will last with such
obvious neglect.
New subject:Will appreciate it if you can give some guidelines as to how I can retrieve your article with
regards to the Crusades.I would like to read it.I do
not how I missed it.If you posted in last December of
2007,I shut off my computer to do things for my wife
for her Christmas,especially my daughter and her husband were coming then from China to spend the
whole Christmas Holidays with us.I miss cyrena’s posts sometimes and then all of sudden I stumble on the ones I missed unexpectedly.
New Subject:As to the Karen Armstrong’s books,the
whole idea of recommending them is to provide with
an introduction about the history of the three
monotheistic religions so that when you read/study or
research about Islam or any of the other two religions,you have the pre-requisites to get deeper and deeper on your own on Islam.I must alert you to
the fact I had encountered:The more I knew about
Islam and the history of the Arabs and their world,
the more I wanted to know-a sort of addiction caused
by sheer fascinations.Armstrong Knows her history very very well.I am not only one who said so.
New Subject:As to the Fatwa(religious edict)passed
Reply to this | Report thisby the late Al-Khomeini of Iran against Salman Rushdie,author of “Satanic Verses”,the people in the
West had overlooked the fact that Al-khomeini and his
Iranian Islamic Revolution were/are Shii’,not Sunni
Muslims and at the same time he was trying out done
Saudi Arabia for the leadership of the Islamic World.
So,that was nothing more than a religious Iranian
bravado only since not a single Islamic/Arabic country came out publicly in supporting his bravado.
It is true they maintained their silence for avoiding
any political clashes with Iran that would play in
Al-Khomaini’s hands.By the way,the vast majority of
Muslims are Sunni,roughly 85-90%.The rest are Shii’
and other small splinters such as Alawites,Ismaelis,
Yazidis,and Druzes.If you recall,in one topic of the
13 topics series,I mentioned that the powerful tribes
of Mecca worshiped the three daughters of God,namely
Al-la’at,Azu,and Manat,I think the whole problem in
Satanic verses stemmed from the verses concerning the
three daughter of God.Salman Rushdi might have missed
what Muhammad meant by these verses.Perhaps,one day,I
may be in a position to explain them to you and others.
That is about it,Shenon.I do hope that you will not
face any difficulty in selling your house,under the
grim current circumstances of the housing market.I
wish you just simple and meaningful success.
Best Regards,
Nabih
By Shenonymous, April 27 at 5:37 am #
(868 comments total)
Nabih, since you have said you read my posts wherever they appear, you would know you are not alone. I have also mentioned the atrocities committed by the Holy Roman Crusades against Islam and Muslims several times elsewhere. Given that Hollywood films are not the epitome of the best research, at any rate, the film Kingdom of Heaven portrays such a Crusade, and of course the Christian community, mostly the Catholic church, complained bitterly about the film as it appears to have depicted the atrocities by the crusading knights (such a romantic notion that always appeal to the adventurous minded though not adventurous bodied).
I found all of your posts at the other article “Nabih Ammari on the Cancer from Within” and indeed you did make quite clear where your mind is. But I knew that since you repeated it here in this article discussion as well on April 1 at 1:01 a.m. There you were pristine where you personally stood with respect to religion and religions. It was from your long study of Islam that we here on this article forum have had the benefit of an explanation, a treatise really, into the nature of Islam. I am grateful as I mentioned my formal education was missing such study even though I have taken many courses in religious studies. They were of the Asian flavors of the month when in the late seventies it was fashionable. I learned in spite of reasons why I took the courses. But I never went back to learn about Islam. I pay the price that I think all ignorant Americans are also paying by now wanting to know about the people of the Middle East and that is impossible without understanding, to the degree as only a Westerner can, Islam and its history and culture. Hence I now own and have seen the film The Message, have five books by Armstrong (as I forgot I ordered even another beyond the ones you recommended), about five articles printed from the Internet, several reviews and sought out objective commentaries, and have ordered The Qur’an, the translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. So I might just be able to fathom to an inch depth some understanding. What good that might do I have already explained is uncertain.
I am sorry that Ozark has withdrawn from our discussion as he has been the pivot point of our involvement on this thread beginning with discussion about dominionism and fascism. But he might return. He has done this before (in February). Having a bright mind he is a brave and an engaging man and wants to know beyond surface understanding.
But whatever is the case, whether he chooses to rejoin or not, I hope we continue some dialogue. I am particularly keen on intellectual pursuits particularly where they concern the morals of humanity. I have withdrawn from all of the political forums as they no longer interest me. The political scene in my opinion is completely constructed by self-serving powers that be and the public is composed mostly of fools who think their opinions count and does some good, but in reality these forums about politics even though there are the occasional excellent mind speaking, it mostly allows the participants to vent or pontificate and not actually do anything. I will become actively involved in the election once the dust settles and there are actual opponents for the office of president.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Nabih Ammari, April 27 at 3:19 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
PART TWO:
=========
Re:The danger of Either/Or April 24 continues:PART TWO
OzarkMichael,
Whatever you decide to consider the Qura’n,it is
absolutely your prerogative.If you wish now to consider it a great literature and Holy book that is
fine with me as long as you call Muhammad the Prophet Mohammad lest you sound contradictory between the
Holy Qura’n and the Prophet Muhammad.Remember they go
together and there is no way out of this.
Another deficiency that produced the misunderstanding was the fact you really did not bother in giving me
your agreement to the following requirements I believed necessary to confine the discussion within
the boundaries of the series of posts I posted about Islam.These requirements were:
(1)No interruption while I was posting the series of posts,on daily basis.
(2)Questions/comments can wait until I finished.
(3)Confine questions only to the content of the posts posted.No More, because the subject at hand is very complex and has enemies across the land.
Shenonymous,as usual was very cooperative on all
three points outlined above.Regret to say that you were not.Another deficiency.It is OK.Just bear with
me for better future cooperation.
Provoking you has never crossed mind.NEVER.On the
contrary,what has crossed my mind,since I have
initiated and facilitated the communications with
you,is the idea that I or Shenonymous or both of us
may be able of providing you with novel ideas and
enough persuasive ammunitions to be the VOICE OF
MODERATION amongst your fellow Evangelicals,
regardless of their various persuasions.I believe
that you have what is needed to carry on the task.
Please consider.
As to the harshness of my words,I meant to shake up a little so that you might come down from your world
of confrontation to the world of cooperation and
illumination.It did not work out that way.Did it?
In short,son,I have not changed my mind about your good quality.At least not yet.I still believe that you are a hell of good man in every sense of the word
Reply to this | Report thisand I truly mean it.We are still friend as far as I
am concerned.
Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio.
By Nabih Ammari, April 27 at 12:27 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re:The danger of Either/Or. April 24
This Post Is composed of TWO PARTS:PART ONE
============================================
OzarkMichae,
I do not have the time nor the energy to dissect every post you have posted about the Qura’n and
Muhammad,just to prove how wrong you were, would not serve any purpose beside creating more misunderstanding between you and myself;I truly tried to avoid it in adhering firmly to the rules I set for myself as I let you and Shenonymous know where I stood before I presented to you the series made of 13 topics about Islam.I have done so in good faith,not to be trapped in an endless ranting because of evil
and totally divisive writings of the politically
motivated characters like Robert Spencer,Daniel Pipes,Norman Podhoretz,Bernard Lewis,,and their ilks.
I do hope that you will think wisely and carefully of what I have just said.Believe me,son,this crowd of haters use religions and 9/11 to cover their real political motive and ideology.Just imagine Spencer telling “Young America” of young minds of teenagers
that they should never apologize for the atrocities committed by the Crusaders against Islam and Muslims.
He claims to be Eastern Catholic.I believe that he is something else.Any way,more than one Pope have already admitted/apologized for the crimes committed against the Muslims,Christians,and Jews of the Middle East by the Crusaders,especially in Jerusalem.I feel I am fighting a lonely battle here through simple means of writing here and there.I will continue to do so until my old age fails me completely.I went off of the subject at hand,but it is ok as long as you get some benefit from.That is up to you to decide.
In this post,I intend to help out in showing you the deficiency in your post and then you can extrapolate
accordingly by yourself for the other posts.I have been in this kind of perturbation and paradox since
the middle of the 1950s when I was still an undergraduate student.That means before you were born
in 5-6 years.Got it,Ozark?
All your above Re can be answered by one paragraph I
suggested to you and Shenonymous,before I started the
13 topics series about Islam,to Google the following:
“Nabih Ammari on The Cancer from Within”
and look for a post of mine dated November 14,2007,
addressed to #113381 by rowman on 11/13.
In that post of mine,there is the following paragraph:
“And I repeat once more,I am not what the above
two statements may convey,and I hold the religious
literature,or rather writing,the Old Testament,the
New Testament and the Qura’n,yes the Qura’n,in high
esteem,but not necessary a believer in their content.”
Clearly I hold the three monotheistic religions in
high esteem as “RELIGIOUS LITERATURE,or rather WRITING”,and my high esteem toward them stops there.
Not one single inch higher.Period.If somebody does not like it,it is just tough luck.You talked about anonymity in the beginning of another post entitled
“Submission”.What kind of anonymity you think I have here,son? just to accommodate your request and try to make the whole complex issue less complex to you.
If you considered the Qura’n a great literature and
“Holy Book” you certainly had failed to express that
in a constructive and proper manner in almost two weeks of posting your posts,to put it mildly.In addition,in the above Re of yours,you called the
Qura’n “Holy Book”.If it is so,then,I have to assume you believed that Muhammad received his “Holy Book”
from God.If so,Muhammad was a Prophet.Right? Not once
you had called Muhammad as “Prophet Muhammad”.Check your post.Many a time I called Muhammad as “Prophet
Muhammad” and the Qura’n as the “Holy Qura’n” to pay some respect to the believers.I do the same for the believers in Christianity and Judaism as well.
Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio.
WILL CONTINUE IN PART TWO....
Reply to this | Report this================================
By Shenonymous, April 25 at 2:57 pm #
(868 comments total)
Mental states
Adieu, monsieur d’Ozark. I am confounded at your withdrawing. You tiptoe so softly away. The dialogue will not be the same without you. It was all about you really. It transformed to be about us who now live here. But you were the gunpowder without a doubt. There will be other times I’m sure to interact.
I cannot imagine the stranglehold Muslims must feel at not being able to express any prudence or reprehension at their own religion or leaders. I saw precisely what was done to Salman Rusdie. I have his book Satanic Verses and have read it with complete amazement that a fatwah was made against him. It is a wonderfully funny book first of all. Two Muslims falling out of the sky into the Thames. Hysterically funny. I did not get a sense of any disrespect for Islam. Maybe I missed something. But wonderment at the machinations of Islam ought to be wholly embraced. It only makes the argument for it much stronger. Very much like your encouragement Nabih for Ozark to continue his harangues (which I enjoyed intellectually nevertheless).
I too would not be even close to being a decent critic at this point, so I will heed your advice Nabih, as I always do. Your wisdom never goes disobeyed.
The final Armstrong text arrived today, The History of God. Even reading the four books of Armstrong’s I do not think I would have much more of decent right to speak cogently about Islam, so I will embark on reading the translation recommended by Ozark of the Quran. I will also have to read some completely reliable interpretations of it including yours as well, since often others’ insights can lead to one’s own. There are a couple of other books I shall speed read, as I am anxious to get on with other issues. But I want to give this its due time.
After that I will make my comments and then hope to put the questions to rest once Nabih answers what I offered. Of course others might want to make comments and be involved. You are all welcome, to be sure. By the way, Nabih, I have written to the website person about getting you registered as a commenter on TruthDig.
I am curious about dreadnaught and hope he is all right. We watch for our own. We hope there was not another not good day for him. Unfortunately they are not predictable and come unbidden. We, as the cliche goes, learn to roll with the punches that the vicissitudes of life lands on our chins. My chin has been bruised a lot. How funny you use a similar cliche as I do, “close enough for government work.” I use it for most anything I do that requires manual skill. Even sometimes for mental skill. I strike a happy medium most times when it seems expedient. res: yes, can also mean event/affair/business/fact; cause; and property, yes, almost anything. The “shape” of water is an odd way of putting it. It is a most shapeless thing. It is a constant shape shifter, never in the same place even in sequential nanoseconds. It is a deceptive substance, as it only appears to take a shape. Hands Across the Water was such a nice song, Paul McCartney’s group Wings, I believe. I could be wrong. Wine? Biscuit? what a gourmet, too. I always go for the Cabernet. Mal a’testa means in Eye Talian, bad or evil in the head. My point is to use, perhaps to exploit, your own words in a way, a nasty habit I have, is that sometimes we get wrongheaded in our word context. We all have done it. We all care enough, however, to push through it onto the next point. Or at least I think we do. Do I have a case of mal a’testa? Where are the children, dreadnaught? What is happening? I am so glad tomorrow is Saturday. Sigh, it was an exhausting week.
Reply to this | Report thisBy OzarkMichael, April 24 at 6:26 pm #
(170 comments total)
Submission
Thank you, Shenonymous, whoever you are. Never to be forgotten as long as I live. Guard your anonymity so you can say what you think. I was not so wise, I have left a few too many clues.
And Nabih, and dreadnaught. . I am a better person for our discussion.
I have no hard feelings against you Nabih. But if a nice agnostic person like yourself sees criminality in criticism of Islam, and imagines a little punishment needs to be handed out for it(bleeding, ignoring, whatever)… imagine how a Muslim feels. Imagine how a fundamentalist Muslim feels.
Islam requires a wide boundry of respect which I have violated. Think of Quran 2:217. The one that says:"All warfare is an awesome evil.” But in that verse fitnah is a more awesome evil, and I was commiting fitnah. Yet I did not expose half of what that verse means, and what it commands and why… out of respect for Nabih. And fear of Islam. The role of critic of Islam is not for me after all. I guess i didnt think this through.
Rather than censor myself further or risk going too far, I bless everyone’s reading of the scholar Karen Armstrong. In a sense I have lost a little chess game with her. Yes I concede, she has more power on her side than I want to contend with.
I like my quiet life far too much, and wish you all a quiet life as well.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Shenonymous, April 24 at 3:35 pm #
(868 comments total)
It wasn't me!
Michael of the Ozark, you always make me laugh. Even when you are defensive. I do so much appreciate you. I hope you can appreciate my appreciating you. Sounds like a country western song. I am humorous. You noted my opinion about the Quran no less than three times in your reply to Nabih (I tried to resist calling it a defensive ploy, although I was not successful, sigh It so much reminds me of the little kiddies I sometime have in my classes. “It wasn’t me! It was those other two”). What I, Shenonymous, think about the Quran is really unimportant as I am atheist, and I have no conscious knowledge of “holy.” But I respect the “holy” books of your religion and Islam for what I can perceive they are. I do not believe either has any direct bearing on my life specifically. But if engaged in a formal polemic about various aspects of them with someone I might make other kinds of arguments. I do have opinions. But that is not what I am about in our present conversation. We are discussing the scholarship of Karen Anderson. I do not know enough about Islam to make any claims about the religion or Muhammad although I am learning, I have become a student because of you and because of Nabih. In my view, the Quran is written very much like poetry, even its structure has what are called verses. It is not outside of legitimacy to call it literature. I would call the Bible literature also. It has verses too. Not quite as poetic as the Quran in my opinion but full of grand stories, full of fables, full of well, that’s enough. The Quran and the Bible have similarities: they both talk about God, and I often wonder if it is the same God? How can they both be about the same God when described so differently? Well that old punisher ‘context’ makes it so. It is as if God were the universal, and of course that is exactly what God is, but then universals are abstract and by that reason interpretations happen. We have been through the basics of this before with Eco. No need to repeat it. Both books talk about prophets, both talk about (and here is where I fume most) women in most disgusting terms, but I will not go into that here except to make that comment in passing. Further, they both talk about killing, worship, sacrifice, how to live, what to eat, how to treat one’s neighbor, and a whole host of many other things. So the books can be compared. As can the religions also be.
I see no contradiction after all. Only categorical mistakes.
I have received all but the book Nabih you wanted me to read first, “The History of God.” So I am reading Muhammad and I do have some comments but I will wait until I have all four and have read all of them. I will not lose any books in my move back home. I have plenty of time to pack.
There is something I will say about the 1/12th of “all warfare is an awesome evil,” soon, but I am very tired from work today and can’t think any further. Tomorrow is an early day to school as well so it won’t be before tomorrow evening before I can even put my regenerated fried brains to it. In the meantime a watchful eye to yours and Nabih’s posts will have to do, and of course if dreadnaught either chimes in or grants us another chapter of his wonderful story. Your story, dn, is such a salve for stretched gray and white matter.
Reply to this | Report thisBy OzarkMichael, April 24 at 6:56 am #
(170 comments total)
The danger of Either/Or
my quote from April 16th:
I would like to say something nice about Islam. I have confidence that the Quran is truly great literature.
Does this in any way contradict that Quran is a Holy Book? I am according every possible concession to Quran. And Shenonymous did the same. I dont see a contradiction.
Nabih, are your harsh words meant to provoke me? Or do you really think The Quran cannot be great literature and a Holy Book at the same time?
You must pick which one it is then. If it is not a Holy Book, argue with Muhammed and not with me. If it is not great literature, then you can argue with Shenonymous.
As for me, i can get along with both. I see no contradiction. But as for you, with such a provocative challenge to me that its a contradiction, you will now have to choose between them yourself.
Either Shenonymous is right and the Quran should be appreciated as great literature- or Muhammed is right and the Quran is Holy. Thats your construction.
You made this into a contradiction, Nabih. Not me.
YOU will have to choose between Shenonymous’ very nice compliment to the Holy Koran and the Holy Koran itself.
Between friends these little misunderstandings can be worked out. I like you enough not to be provoked, and hopefully you like me enough to reconsider what you have accused me of. Because The Quran is great literature and a Holy Book. Don’t you agree?
Reply to this | Report thisBy Nabih Ammari, April 24 at 2:53 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re:A Qura’n Study Performed With Honesty And Respect
a Holy Book Deserve April 23
Re:Great literature April 16
OzarkMichael,
The above two posts of yours contradict one another.
Make up your mind:Is the Qura’n a great literature
or a Holy Book deserve respect.
Your ranting for the last 10 days did not sound that you have respect to the Prophet Mohammad nor to the
Qura’n.Nor your rantings have made any sense to me.
No constructive coherence in them.Please do not
expect me to read them any more.
Whoever you consult is not doing any good.I think I know exactly whom.
OzarkMichael write:
“In that case I wont attacking her,..etc..”
Please DO NOT STOP ATTACKING Karen Armstrong.Please,
Keep attacking her.Your attack is producing WONDERS.
Without your attack,the splendid and outstanding
results of Shenonymous’reseaches,mostlikely,would
not have been possible.JUST KEEP ATTACKING....
Backing Karen Armstrong:A strong formidable,highly
Reply to this | Report thisknowledgeable,sincere and an honest writer like
Karen Armstrong needs no backing,whatsoever,from me or from anybody else.Her haters cannot match her splendid works.She has the persuasive power to
expose the fallacy of those who are creating more
hatred amongst the three monotheistic religions.
She stands for understanding and harmony amongst the three religions while the sources you get your
information from stand for the opposite of what
she stands for.Pity,Pity,and more Pity.
Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio.
By Nabih Ammari, April 24 at 12:49 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re:Rigor April 23
Shenonymous,
I salute you for the outstanding researches you have
done to come just close to the truth.Splendid,indeed.
Please continue doing what you have done,not for anyb