Are Christians more tolerant than Muslims

Originally posted by Scorpius   If you are a true Muslim or true Christian, the idea of forcing people by burning their houses, torturing them, using violance and terror by any means, is out of question. These actions only help you to get a very warm place in Hell , and guess what, there is no winter time in Hell as long as I imagine   So when we say Muslim or a Christian, we accept that by definition (assuming thet they are following their holly books, otherwise again by definition they are not Muslims or Christians, only fake ones?) they are incapable of doing such evils.   But I get your point, I hope you understand my point,too.

Now Chok Gech, you might say anything about Islamic wars. But why don't you have a glance at what Khalifa Omar has written to Iranian 'third Yazdgerd'? Contemporary Iranians religion was 'Zartosht' which is abbriviated in three sentences: 'good saying; good deeds, good thoughts'. So, you their religion and those who practiced it didn't deserve Islamic 'Jihannam' (hell). Khalifa Omar invited him to Islam and you know what Iranian king replied? He said: 'stay with your religion and I'll stay with mine' (ofcourse he explained how Zartosht was to Khalifa Omar). But the Arabic Amir STARTED the war.

Or just as an example:

Edited by gok_toruk - 18-Aug-2006 at 12:52

Originally posted by gok_toruk . But why don't you have a glance at what Khalifa Omar has written to Iranian 'third Yazdgerd'?

Originally posted by gok_turuk See, a thing is either inside time content or outside it. So, if God is outside it, how can God affect things inside time content? Please, don't get me wrong. I do believe in God; I just can't get to know how God is and in my opinion, religions also were not succesful. Please, don't say there's not an answer as most of Moslems. If a question has not got a paradox, so it must have a logical answer.

I guess you have to change it a bit again Omar. Are you sure you dont mean a nation instead. How many people does a "population" take? We have villages here in DK in which population never exceeded 100 people. Imagine a similar village in India were converted by force, then your statement fails on that alone.

Possibly a few small villages like that have been. I say population to exclude isolated examples that are irrelevent to history. The largest case is the Nuristan provence of Afghanistan. Hardly an example that can be used to claim that 'muslims were converted by force'.

Also - Force doesnt necessarily need to be physical, mentally abuse and force can even be a lot worse.

I mean deliberately creating a situation where a person feels they must change their faith. Creating it by accident (aka, all your friends converted or something) is entirely a different kettle of fish.

All religions have done this, also in much larger scales, and also - no religion has converted a whole nation from one belief to another - so whats the point in making the statement exclusive  for Islam?

I make the point exclusive to Islam only because I am countering people who claim that islam has done it. It is true for many other religions as well and when people try and spread propaganda about those religions I have argued with them too. btw, some religions have forced whole nations, South America, Baltics, etc.

I cannot judge the author of the article I pointed out. I have no knowledge to do so. It just seemed to me he had his sources sorted out, and he also did a comprehensive research himself over more years. You can claim its anti-Islamic propaganda and bullsh++ , but to me he seems quite balanced in his views.

Balanced? Its completely wrong. I struggle to pin-point one part of the article to make a counter point. Its completely removed from the history of the subcontinent.
If Vijayanager was looted and destroyed upon its capture, then it was hindus doing it. Because there just weren't enough (and really still aren't) enough muslims that far south in India to do it.
It'd be like saying that the Japanese held a reign of terror in chilie.

Omar, you the man. plz forgive those who trespass your wisdom for they do not know better.

There are two categories of Quran verses. Makki, which are written in Mekka and Madani, which are written In Medina. Makki verses are mostly tolerant and promise the peace and love of Allah, Madani verses are inclueded aggressive verses which sentence non-muslims (kafirs) to death and they are specially misogynic. The reason for this paradox is Mohammad was alone and without might in Mekka. In Mekka he was an odd one out, no one liked him and he had to fight with people's sarcasm toward his religion.so he have written peacefull verses. Things has changed as he fled to Madina. Everyone loved him there and for the first time he could enjoy the might, so that's the reason for the aggressive verses.

Edited by Maziar - 19-Aug-2006 at 08:09

Sorry my friend (chok gech); but I'm not able for the time being to provide you with teh links. But Iranians like Maziar would do this for you. Ask any Iranian. You might be right also. But as Iranian document, it is believed Khalifa Omar started the war. Especially, we know that, at that time, Iranians were busy, fighting with internal risks rather than thinking to any foreign nation. I'm just surprised to hear 'there's no document about forced invasion'. Ask any Iranian, I told you, and you'll get your answer.

 I'm studying Electrical Engineering in one of the best universities of Middle East (not to show off ). My mathematical skills are not bad. I know infinity plus 1 is again infinity. But it's just kind of a contract. You can't reach infinity; so it's not a real amount. Mathematics have kind of a contract on infinity. But refer to your mind. You can't say something is the greatest amount in the world. Just because numbers are not finite. Any number could be added simply by 1 and you'll reach a greater number. You gotta think a lot on this matter. It's not so simple to get my point. I wish you'd studied philosophy to see what it has got to say about infinity.

Edited by gok_toruk - 19-Aug-2006 at 11:50