March 29, 2011

Congressman says Islam is the Religion of Peace

By Francis Nye

We're the religion of peace. 
If you don't belive it,
we'll kill you.
 Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) made the following statement regarding the Committee on Homeland Security hearing titled “The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community’s Response.”

“In the nine years since the dreadful attacks on September 11th, America has sought to reconcile differences among ourselves and with the world. We have sought friendship with Muslim and Arab communities. President Obama, at the beginning of his term, traveled to the Middle East, underscoring the importance of that region.

“Despite efforts to improve relations between our nation and the Muslim and Arab world, America has stumbled. Two wars have been waged in the Middle East, further degrading our image among the world’s Muslim and Arab people.

“A Congressional hearing to investigate our friends and neighbors jeopardizes the fragile progress we have made and creates a longer gap for peace to bridge.

“This hearing insinuates that violence and the Muslim religion go hand in hand. Nothing could be further from the truth. Islam is a religion based upon peace, goodwill and the ethical treatment of all people on this planet.”

What the congressman is really saying here is that the Muslim religion is not a religion of violence but of peace.  Furthermore, he is saying that actions of western civilization, mostly the United States have somehow disrupted that peace.  That is truly an astonishing statement.  In the history of Islam there has only been 13 years of peace.  Islam should be labeled the religion of war instead of peace.

I think the congressmen’s understanding of the Koran is somewhat different then most others of that faith. He might live a peaceful life but his brethren surely do not.  You see this is the problem with holy books; all holy books.  They are so cobbled together over such large periods of time by so many unknown authors that the followers interpret them to say anything that they fancy be it peaceable or bellicose.

The Koran was memorized by thousands before finally being put to paper 70 years after the prophet’s death.  It is no small wonder that this book has conflicting messages that are open to interpretation.   The other problem with the Koran and other books such as the Bible is that they have been translated and updated to meet the language needs of the time so often that things get added, subtracted, or mistranslated.  This further adds to the confusion of the original message. 

For example in the Koran some translations says that martyrs of the faith will go to heaven and be given 72 black-eyed virgins.   The Arabic language was born as a written language for the Koran. Many of the words used in the original texts were of Syriac or Aramaic.  So without getting into too many details the point is the word “virgin” as well as the entire verse has been mistranslated today.  The actual translation of the verse in question says that the martyrs will be given “white raisins” of “crystal clarity”.  Can you imagine the surprise on the faces of those poor young bastards that killed themselves in the 9-11 attacks when they got to heaven and Allah said, “Great work guys. Here are your raisins.”

The Bible is not immune to this problem of mistranslations either.  The Bible was written over a period of 900 years by 40 authors.   The Bible suffers from much worse translation errors than the Koran does.

The word virgin has also been mistranslated for the original Hellenistic Greek.  The actual translation means a woman of marrying age or a maiden, not a woman who has never had sexual intercourse.  So Jesus’ mother, Mary was not a virgin when she conceived Jesus but a maiden.

There are two hebrew words usually translated 'virgin' in English. 'Bethulah' means virgin in the sense that we understand it. It was used, for example, in Isaiah 62:5. 'Almah' (the word used in Isaiah 7:14) simply means a young woman. Although it is sometimes used in the sense of a sexually pure woman, this is not it's exclusive usage. The context will usually point out the correct usage.

The confusion arose when the Greek Septuagint used the greek word 'parthenos' to translate Isaiah 7:14. This word, in Greek, does denote a sexually pure woman, and was the inspiration for the gospellers myth of the Virgin birth.

A look at the context of Isaiah 7:14 will quickly reveal that the woman that Isaiah was referring to was probably already pregnant, thus pointing out which sense of 'almah' was intended. In any case, the point of Isaiah's prophecy was that before the child reached the age of accountability, both Israel and Syria would be desolated. (A prophecy which was only partly fulfilled, by the way). The use of the word 'virgin' is not germane in Isaiah's prophecy. The 'sign' was the child, not a miraculous conception.

In short, Isaiah's 'sign' was fulfilled in it's own context, hundreds of years before anyone thought to apply it in a different sense.

Another example that comes to mind is the story of the Hebrew’s exodus from Egypt.  In this story the Hebrew people are fleeing slavery from the Egyptians.  They are being led by Moses the hero of the story.  The Egyptians are chasing the Hebrew people who are on foot with fast moving chariots.  The Hebrews come to a body of water.  In the original Hebrew writing we have the Hebrew slaves crossing the Reed Sea which is only a meter deep.  It’s more of a salt marsh that is subject to tidal influences.  But in the modern version of the Bible the Hebrews are crossing the Red Sea which is 1000 meters deep.  This discrepancy between the Reed Sea and the Red Sea is paramount to the meaning of this story because in the latter interpretation Moses is said to part the waters of the Red Sea, truly a miracle.  However the crossing of the Reed Sea is really no big deal at all when on foot but tragic when riding in a chariot.  So you see in one interpretation Moses receives God like powers in the other he is seen as pulling off good military tactics by leading his pursuers into a salt marsh to get stuck, evading their pursuers. These kinds of mistakes and contradictions happen over and over again in the Bible and the Koran as well as other holy books. 

With all that being said my opinion differs from Congressman, Kucinich.  The Muslim religion may for some people be a religion of peace but not to all and certainly not in the eyes of history.  In my view it is a religion of death and oppression.  We see evidence of this all over the world today.  Just a few days ago Islam raised its ugly head and detonated a bomb attached to a phone booth in Jerusalem that blew up the main bus station there.  I admit the media does a good job at saying we are in a war against terrorism but in reality it is really a war against religiously motivated murders.  Ω

What are your thoughts on this situation?  Please let me know below in the comment section.

Video: What Muslims Don't Know About the Quran

Video: Bible & Koran Translations;

No comments:

Post a Comment