Reply #61: I don't. [View All]

[Igel]

I looked at your link and am always amazed by the sheer quantity of good will Ahmedinejad arouses in people. They read what he said, and find some way of spinning it in the best possible light.

Try saying things like "The black race must vanish from the pages of time" and see if that's not taken to be offensive. Or perhaps "Islam must vanish from the pages of time."

In other instances, the writer sets up a strawman: the myth of the Holocaust is placed above God. Which means, contrary to the way that most people read it, that the Holocaust is placed above God. And a rather less concise translation, meaning the same thing, is proffered to debunk the non-reading. Silliness.

There are two usual ways to reconcile the differences between the early Muslims and what Muhammed's alleged to have written. The first is to say the revelations were inferior from the get-go. This doesn't let anybody off the hook, because where the revelations contradict Muhammed there's still a problem. The second is that the followers of each prophet corrupted, intentionally, what was written. Ahmedinejad is unlikely to believe that Jesus or Moses came and issued all the words attributed to him any more than he is that Moses wrote all the words attributed to him. For some conflict with Islam. So unless 'injunctions of the prophets' is indirect speech, Ahmedinejad's speaking in *'s voice, he doesn't mean the Ahmedinejad-friendly interpretation.

The use of 'monotheism' in the next blip is consistent with this: Jesus as God is not monotheism. Tawhid is the unity of God, his singleness: there is only one, who has issued the substantially same message at least three times, only the last being complete. Ahmedinejad offered Islam to * and others; he's doing it again.