Automotive Deals Best Books of the Month Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it Stephen Marley Fire TV Stick Sun Care Handmade school supplies Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis STEM Segway miniPro

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-20 of 20 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Feb 13, 2006 8:21:28 AM PST
J. K. Akins says:
I always find it interesting when people like the writer of the "A Bigoted Diatribe" review simply dismiss work like Spencer's as bigoted, but then fail to give a single substantiating reason. Clearly this book is disturbing, and clearly this book presents us with a view at great variance with the standard thinking of today. Unlike the standard thinking of today, however, this book offers factual evidence, logically presented, to make its case, rather than warm fuzzy wishes and indignant dismissals.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 13, 2006 4:24:36 PM PST
All too often, when someone identifies themselves as "Politically Incorrect", what they mean is "Offensive Jerk". They might think that they are bold and daring and speaking a truth that everyone else is afraid to say, but 9 times out of 10, they're just an offensive jerk.

This book is a simplistic look at a complicated and oft-times self-contradictory religion.

The tricky bit with religion is that different sects will honor different portions of the same "sacred" text, and there is very little understanding of this in Spencer's book. There's a significant difference between the Wahabist Muslims with there fundamentalist Cartoon Violence, and the mostly secularized Muslims of Turkey's larger cities.

It would be easy to create a similar book vilifying Christianity by taking a few quotes out of context, and railing against the Religious Right in America.

Or, to go for the absurd:
http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 20, 2006 6:10:21 PM PST
T. Patterson says:
This book is littered with these comparison quotes from Jesus and Muhammad. The author's pick and choose what they consider to be 'equivalent' quotes from the Bible and the Koran where Muslims look violent and irrational and Christians look peaceful and loving. The authors provide no context for their scripture reference, no scholarly interpretation, so it's clearly aimed at making Muslims look bad. There is a quote from Jesus that has been conspicuously left out: "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace on Earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword" (Matthew 10:34). I wonder why the authors of this book chose to leave that quote out. It's real easy to pick and choose verses out of books as big as the Koran and Bible and present an image of those religions as either peaceful or violent. It's also completely deceptive and anyone who thinks this book is a presentation of the definitive truth on Muslims needs to stop drinking and Kool-Aid and might want to reads some books on the subject by scholarly writers.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 5, 2006 10:15:29 AM PST
Respectfully to J.K. Akins - perhaps the lack of 'substantiating reasons' is lacking because the author of that post felt that it should be obvious.

What I mean by this is that to many Christians, all one needs to know is where they stand with God. Anything else is meaningless, including the length of life here on Earth, which is and ever shall be temporary. Life Eternal in the Kingdom of Heaven is not a reward, nor is life in Hell a punishment; both are consequences, nothing more. It therefore becomes an easy matter to simply choose God's way for us, and engagement in political or economic struggle for dominance of any kind must therefore be viewed as futile and ridiculous, or at least an expression of politics, not religion.

Most cultures throughout history have confused and melded politics, power and religion anyway, so your point of view is understandable. To claim that this culture or that one is misguided is to merely orient yourself politically to one side more than to another, but much more significant is that you are not choosing to rise above it.

It is my personal belief that God wishes for us ALL to rise above the political struggles in which those who would bastardize our religious differences for economic or political gain would have us become engaged. To do so in the name of God merely weighs all participants down with the blood of the conflict on their (both sides') hands, but far worse, besmears His good name. Perhaps that is why He chooses not to reveal it to us so readily.

As it is written (sic): "Let he who has ears, hear; let he who has eyes, see."

You ask "people like the writer" for historical or literary references; how will you then act in your place within Eternity at the end of your days without your libraries along to guide you? Is not the place for any learning to be within your heart? How do you choose, of your many teachers, living and dead, to whom you will listen? It is apparent that quotations can be pulled from any number of sources to confuse and beguile the mind, usually for the benefit of some hidden (well, rarely overt) agenda. Is not the One voice alive in your heart? Be careful what you ask for; remember the lessons of Eden.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 4, 2006 12:29:41 AM PDT
CC Boldt says:
You are amongst those who like to quote scripture, but who also take it out of context. You can't just pick and choose verses to mean what you want them to. If you would actually READ the entire chapter, you would see that Jesus is talking about "splitting" familes apart. Those who believe and those who do not. Those who are the children of the prince of this world, and those who are the children of the "Prince of Peace." The sword is allegorical, like many of his parables. The author chose to leave that verse out because it does not mean what you have chosen to believe it means.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 7, 2006 6:39:46 AM PDT
A reader says:
This reader obviously did not pay much attention when reading this book- that particular passage "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace on Earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword" (Matthew 10:34). IS QUOTED - very clearly - on page 27. The comparisons between Jesus Christ and Muhammed are (to my surprise) written very evenhandedly. I had picked up this book expecting it to be bigoted crap, but it turns out it is not. It mostly quotes the Qu'ran, and muslim scholars, which is enough to make it clear that Islam is not truly of God without it even being necessary to mention Christianity or Judaisim (although the author obviously does quote Jesus copiously and does use the direct comparisons). This is an excellent book, exposing the incredible differences between the tolerant, peaceful Christian message and the often intolerant, and sometimes violent message of Islam. Islam is so often painted by the PC media as a peaceful religion (I bought into this myself, before reading this book, as well as "An introduction to Islamic Law" by Joseph Schacht, and The Qu'ran, translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali- a Muslim). Muhammed's message is painted by the media as being peaceful, similar to Christ's message of peace in Christianity, but when one actually sees for themeslves what the Qur'an teaches, it is obvious that the message is not one of tolerance or "live and let live" but one of WAR against any "Infidels" who reject Muhammed as God's prophet. And before you dismiss me as a Christian fundamentalist, you should know I've been an athiest all my life. However, reading this book (and others) makes me realize how "Christian" I've been in my beliefs and behavior - without conciously realizing it. It is dangerous to take our generally peaceful, plentiful society for granted, and allow Islamic fundamentalists to spread their message of hate unabated. The author of this book has studied Islam for over 20 years- he is scholarly, and I highly recommend it to all.

In reply to an earlier post on May 24, 2006 9:20:42 AM PDT
Suzanne says:
Welllll ... the sword is not entirely an allegory, to be fair. Let me first clarify: I'm a Born Again Christian. I come in peace ;)

Lest those against us use this teaching in support of their presupposition that Christians are out to kill non-Christians, clarity is needed.

Jesus was not speaking of a sword that Christians will use against non-Christians. He was speaking of the literal sword (and other killing implements) used AGAINST Christians by non-Christians (Muslims included). John 18:2b reads: "yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he offers God service."

In reply to an earlier post on May 26, 2006 5:32:07 PM PDT
P. Brady says:
Actually, Spencer does refer to this quote in Chapter 2, page 27. He has gone out of his way to provide a balanced analysis, even going so far as to recommend reading the Qur'an. He did...did you? Did you even read Spencer's book, for that matter?

In reply to an earlier post on May 28, 2006 9:20:07 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 28, 2006 9:23:04 AM PDT
Yes, but Jesus never says kill all infidels and Mohammad clearly does. Nor does he say everyone should follow my rules except for me. When I want to do something against the rules I set for others God has not made a convenient exception for me and Mohammad clearly does say that.

In reply to an earlier post on May 29, 2006 6:06:18 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on May 29, 2006 6:22:21 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 1, 2006 9:05:02 AM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Jun 1, 2006 9:16:21 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 17, 2006 8:13:57 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 17, 2006 8:20:13 PM PST
THAT was his whole point! That text from the Qur'an is being taken *out of context* and used to give a particular impression (i.e. one of inherent violence) ...

Indeed, you have proven his point even more succinctly.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 17, 2006 8:18:22 PM PST
Umm... "Muslims" weren't around in the time of Jesus... and in fact, if you ask any Muslim, they will tell you that Jesus was/is a Muslim himself.

"Muslim" meaning literally: One who submits to the Will of God, the Creator.

In fact, Muslims believe that if one does not accept the Prophethood of Jesus, then one is not of the "saved"... Acknowledgement of Jesus is a FUNDAMENTAL part of Islam.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 18, 2006 8:11:40 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 13, 2008 11:16:04 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 11, 2007 9:08:55 AM PST
Circa 1860 says:
You see, that's where Gus gets it wrong ... it would not be easy to create a similar book vilifying Christianity ... against the Religious Right in American. Go ahead, Gus, cherry pick just one example that remotely compares to the Islamic Fascist spreading their hatred today. Just one. And for every one you fabricate, I'll give you a rebuttal as to how Christians and Jews have acted to squash it. Please give me just one example of how Muslims are taking an active role (e.g., the sacrafice of their lives)to stop this hatred eminating from their faith.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 23, 2007 6:47:59 PM PDT
I'm no biblical scholar, but I don't that a biblical passage was conspicuously left out. For example, "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace on Earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword" (Matthew 10:34)." is not about violence "by" the followers of Christ, but "to" them. Jesus is prophesying about how the sword will be used upon his followers. You really have to read the additional versus to understand the true meaning. For example, Matthew 10:39 says, "He who found his life shall lose it, and he who lost his life for my sake shall find it." I take this to mean that Jesus is talking about His followers who will lose their earthly life "by the sword" for preaching in His name. Isn't that still happening today in countries that won't tolerate Christianity?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 23, 2007 6:48:18 PM PDT
I'm no biblical scholar, but I don't that a biblical passage was conspicuously left out. For example, "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace on Earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword" (Matthew 10:34)." is not about violence "by" the followers of Christ, but "to" them. Jesus is prophesying about how the sword will be used upon his followers. You really have to read the additional versus to understand the true meaning. For example, Matthew 10:39 says, "He who found his life shall lose it, and he who lost his life for my sake shall find it." I take this to mean that Jesus is talking about His followers who will lose their earthly life "by the sword" for preaching in His name. Isn't that still happening today in countries that won't tolerate Christianity?

Posted on Jan 27, 2012 5:35:53 PM PST
Lizabeth says:
I am a Christian and an American. I read this book and was dismayed. I don't think the author necessarily got the views of the average Muslim, but he definetly got the parts of Islam the extremists are using. The question is, since none of the Islamic countries are really democracies, what are their leaders thinking. What are their plans on the world's stage? Do they believe as the extremists do or are they using them?
I don't know if his portrait of Mohammed was accurate or not, but I wonder how much that matters. Its not Mohammed did or did not do, its what today's extremists believe thats important. Facts that contradict their beliefs won't be listened to.
The other somewhat dismaying thing is the rate of increase in Islam. What will all those future Muslims think, what are they being taught. There have been sufficent news stories of culture clashes in countries with large Islam immigrant populations to make one uneasy. Most groups, when they immigrate, eventually assimilated into their new societies. This does not seem to be happening, nor do the governments and people of the countries involved seem to be encouraging it. This strikes me as shortsighted

And the Muslims believe in Jesus alright, they believe he is a Prophet, that he was not crucified as Allah snuck an imposter in. They believe He will return to earth and assist in spreading Islam.

I hated writing this, I am generally a tolerant person. But tolerating the Muslim Extremists is dangerous. There has got to be a way to be sure more moderate voices prevail, i just wish I knew what it was. One thing we must do, I know I am not the first person to suggest this either, we must mount an effort equal to the Manhatten Project to elimanate our dependence on oil.
And I wish there were more impartial books, I thought I had found one, but then someone on another thread here had documentation that the author supported Muslim extremists. Thats assuming his source was accurate. What a mess.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 27, 2012 8:50:16 PM PST
Ard Fhaidh says:
Lizabeth says: "One thing we must do, I know I am not the first person to suggest this either, we must mount an effort equal to the Manhatten Project to elimanate our dependence on oil."

Ard Fhaidh
Hello Lizabeth.

Here is the good news:
Government Report: America's Combined Energy Resources Largest on Earth

Far larger than those of Saudi Arabia, China, and Canada combined

Link to CRS Report: U.S. Fossil Fuels Resouces

Washington, D.C. - Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Ranking Member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, today released an updated government report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) showing America's combined recoverable oil, natural gas, and coal endowment is the largest on Earth. America's recoverable resources are far larger than those of Saudi Arabia (3rd), China (4th), and Canada (6th) combined. And that's not including America's immense oil shale and methane hydrates deposits.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=04212e22-c1b3-41f2-b0ba-0da5eaead952

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=e94a67da-802a-23ad-4ac9-807e78062077

The bad news is we can't get at these resources because powerful special interests obstruct the development of these resources.

.

Lizabeth says: "But tolerating the Muslim Extremists is dangerous."

Ard Fhaidh
No less so than appeasing the Nazis.

Posted on Jan 28, 2012 5:50:44 PM PST
Lizabeth says:
My husband, who has a Masters in Natural Resources Management says some of our energy problem is getting systems in place to distribute new types of fuel and getting plants in place to process the old ones. I say we might not have the same solutions for all parts of the country, ie. electric cars that work in cities do not work over long rural distances, low to the ground vehicles are useless in snow country but great in the south.Biologic diesel, again, good in the south---not so much in sub-zero climates. In any case, we need to get moving on this.
My mother was English, she ran an anti-aircraft gun in London during the Battle of Britian, my Dad was a Canadian MP during the Occupation---don't get me started on Nazi appeasement.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  17
Total posts:  20
Initial post:  Feb 13, 2006
Latest post:  Jan 28, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam by Robert Spencer (Audio Cassette - November 1, 2005)
3.9 out of 5 stars (868)