Hey, at least we can take comfort from the words of the Orlando shooter’s father

[The Jorge]

Well it's a part of several wider problems, really. One is the availability of guns in the US, another is homophobia in general, another is radical Islam, but another is Islam and whether a faithful adherence to all of its tenets is compatible with life in a socially liberal western culture. Focusing on one of those issues does not obviate the others, I'm afraid.

Given he's killed a bunch of people in the middle of the holy month I'm going out on a limb to say he's not the most devout adherent.

[Burney]

Given he's killed a bunch of people in the middle of the holy month I'm going out on a limb to say he's not the most devout adherent.

Not really. There's nothing that precludes the pursuit of Jihad during Ramadan.

[The Jorge]

Not really. There's nothing that precludes the pursuit of Jihad during Ramadan.

Kind of one of the big things about Ramadan is that you're on your best behaviour. And you'll know that Jihad is a much wider thing too then, presumably.

[Burney]

Kind of one of the big things about Ramadan is that you're on your best behaviour. And you'll know that Jihad is a much wider thing too then, presumably.

Yes, but since he is explicitly following the instructions laid out by his religion in his actions, he could quite easily have justified his actions as holy and therefore not only not in contravention of Ramadan, but actively in keeping with it.

[The Jorge]

Yes, but since he is explicitly following the instructions laid out by his religion in his actions, he could quite easily have justified his actions as holy and therefore not only not in contravention of Ramadan, but actively in keeping with it.

Sure, though the Quoran is also pretty against killing people in other places. It's a bit like the bible like that.

[IUFG]

Now, I have not read either of these 2,000+ year old guidebooks of how to conduct oneself.

I take it both say killing someone is a generally a bad thing. Are there appendices which list when it is actually acceptable?

[The Jorge]

Now, I have not read either of these 2,000+ year old guidebooks of how to conduct oneself.

I take it both say killing someone is a generally a bad thing. Are there appendices which list when it is actually acceptable?

That's pretty much the long and the short of it, yes.

[Burney]

Now, I have not read either of these 2,000+ year old guidebooks of how to conduct oneself.

I take it both say killing someone is a generally a bad thing. Are there appendices which list when it is actually acceptable?

The Qu'ran is only about 1,300 years old. The New Testament is between 400 and 600 years older and offers no justifications for killing whatsoever. 'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone'; 'Judge not lest ye be judged'; 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, sayeth the Lord'; ' - all of these explicitly demand that Christians do not even pass judgment, let alone perpetrate violence.

There is no such prohibition in Islam - quite the reverse, in fact.

[Ash]

Now, I have not read either of these 2,000+ year old guidebooks of how to conduct oneself.

I take it both say killing someone is a generally a bad thing. Are there appendices which list when it is actually acceptable?

Much of the book of Deuteronomy. Though, as has been pointed out, the OT is full of nasty stuff completely with odds of what Christianity is supposed to be about, and the NT supercedes all the rules of acceptable smiting and slavery and raping.

At this point we need the Ganpati chap to expound his theory that what Jesus was preaching was the Eastern philosophy he'd learned in the 'wilderness'. I find it quite plausible really, seeing as the OT seems so obviously a handbook of the leadership of a primative tribal culture where stuff was generally done according to violence, then along comes Jesus saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change. Radical stuff.

[Burney]

Sure, though the Quoran is also pretty against killing people in other places. It's a bit like the bible like that.

Yeah, but that comparative argument with Christianity doesn't really wash, since Christianity is based on the New Testament and the teachings of Christ, which explicitly preclude the killing of anyone and are profoundly non-violent. The theology is pretty clear: Christ's teachings and sacrifice represent a new covenant between God and man that overwrites the Old Testament - which I agree is pretty ****ed up in parts. However, the Old Testament is simply not fundamental to Christian faith - whatever the more extreme protestant fundamentalists may pretend - and therefore can offer no meaningful justification for any violent actions by a Christian.

Islam, by contrast, takes all of the Qur'an as the explicit word of God as expressed to his prophet - contradictions and all. Ultimately, Christ's teachings are explicitly and consistently non-violent, while those of Muhammed are not. Pointing to the Old Testament and suggesting that Christians are no better than Muslims in respect of the violence of their doctrine is simply not valid, I'm afraid.