ฝึกพูดภาษาอังกฤษด้วยเทคนิค Shadowing จากวิดีโอ: Daniel Johnson | Islam Is Not A Peaceful Religion | Oxford Union

Ladies and gentlemen, I very nearly decided not to come today.

Yesterday, a British soldier was decapitated in cold blood on the

streets of London by Islamists shouting Allahu Akbar one of them

told the British public you people will never be safe why

should I a married father of four take the risk of questioning the religion of peace at a public debate

that will be filmed

and no doubt appear on the internet I have met Ayaan Hirsi Ali who was forced to live in hiding

and then to leave Europe after her friend Theo van Gogh suffered the same fate as the soldier in Amsterdam.

I have met the historian Benny Morris who was assaulted outside the London School of Economics by Muslim students merely

because he was an Israeli.

I have British friends who have been forced to move to a secure gated refuge because of similar threats.

But I have come precisely because I do not want to live in fear in a free country, our country.

I do not want this great university, our university, to become a place where academics are intimidated.

I do not want free speech to die in the land

that gave this most precious of liberties to the rest of the world, including many of the 56 states that call themselves Islamic.

I do not want Muslim women to endure domestic tyranny.

The Pew survey reveals

that more More than 90 % of the world's 1 .5 billion Muslims believe

that wives must always obey their husbands – 90%.

Earlier today, I attended the funeral of a dear friend, Professor Geza Vermes, a man whose remarkable career shows what freedom means

and why we must fight to preserve it here in Oxford.

It was only because he, unlike his parents, survived the Holocaust in Hungary that he ever came here to found the discipline of Jewish studies.

Gezer was hidden from the Nazis by the Church and after the war became a Catholic priest, but later he criticised the Church's attitude to the Dead Sea Scrolls,

which he insisted should be made available to the academic world regardless of their implications for the origins of Christianity.

Indeed he became a leading expert and was the first to translate them into English.

Later he left the priesthood to get married and decided to revert to his Jewish roots.

Here Here in Oxford, Geyser began to investigate what he called the Jewish Jesus, not the son of God or even the founder of Christianity but a charismatic Jewish preacher.

Geyser challenged Christian orthodoxy at every point, though just before he died he also shocked orthodox rabbis by showing in an article for Standpoint,

the not very right wing magazine that I edit,

that crucifixion had been used by Jewish rulers as well as Roman ones with a foot in both Jewish

and Christian camps

but beholden to neither Geyser enlarged our knowledge of the world

of Jesus more than anybody else in our time I've dwelt

on his career the career of Geyser Vermesh for one simple

reason none of it none of it would have been possible

in any Islamic country his change of religion would have been treated as apostasy despite the fact

that the Quran suggests only the Quran suggests only that an apostate will suffer in the next world,

under Sharia law, it is a capital offence and many Muslim majority countries do in fact impose the death penalty.

The latest Pew survey suggests that a majority of Muslims around the world agree with this draconian punishment.

Even worse in the eyes of Islamic authority was Geza Vermesh's investigation of Jesus.

If he had attempted to apply the same modern scholarly methods to the Prophet Muhammad in an Islamic country,

he would certainly have been executed for blasphemy as a non -Muslim or for apostasy if he had been a Muslim.

One recent example was a leading Islamic scholar in Sudan,

Mahmoud Taha, who was executed for apostasy merely because he presented Islam as a religion of peace,

drawing on Muhammad's more conciliatory sayings rather than the warlike doctrines he later adopted.

Not only would an open -minded intellectual like Geza Vermesh have no place in an Islamic country, but a university like Oxford,

in which liberty of research into everything, including Islam, is not merely permitted but obligatory, could not exist.

There are no universities in this sense in the Muslim world, and the academic study of Islam, and especially of its founder,

has been greatly inhibited by the suppression of free intellectual inquiry.

Now, how does this lack of free speech and inquiry bear on the question we are debating tonight?

In my view, it is crucial.

Islam has the potential to be a religion of peace.

No, sorry, I'm not taking points of information.

But it will need to evolve a great deal if it is actually to become a religion of peace.

Islam cannot evolve unless Muslim authorities, both religious and secular, allow the freedoms we in the West take for granted.

Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of conscience.

Of course these freedoms go together with other basic principles which are absent in those countries.

Equality before the law, civil and political rights, constitutional democracy, economic liberty, the separation of church or mosque and state.

All these ideas emerged in the West

because the Judeo -Christian tradition has always evolved in classical and medieval renaissance and enlightenment periods and it is still evolving today.

As a Catholic I must acknowledge that it is only in my lifetime

that the church adapted its teaching on the Jews from enemies to brothers

and in order to ensure that the 1 .2 billion Catholics could see

that the Church banished anti -Semitism in its practice as well as its preaching, successive popes have gone out of their way to reach out to Jewish people.

How very different is the situation in Islam?

Where Jews and Christians have allowed the reinterpretation of the Bible,

Muslim scholars have insisted that the Koran as the unmediated word of Allah cannot be reinterpreted.

Despite this rigidity, Islam did evolve in its early centuries, but since the medieval period it has undergone successive waves of

fundamentalism intended to restore the faith to its original purity and to impose it, if necessary by force, on the rest of the world.

We are living through such a wave today which includes the Wahhabi

and Salafist branches of Sunni and the Iranian -inspired Shia Islam.

The overall name we give to these movements is Islamism or radical Islam.

Rather than emphasize the earlier, more specific elements in Muhammad's teaching, such as his constitution of Medina, which granted equal rights to Jews, Christians and Pagans.

Islamists emphasize later doctrines, such as the division of the world into the Dar ul -Islam and the Dar ul -Hab, the House of Islam and the House of War.

We are living, apparently, in the House of War.

Or, the draconian enforcement of Sharia law.

Not content with the attempt to convert non -Muslims, Islamists stress the obligation to carry out jihad, understood to mean holy war, including terrorism.

As we saw yesterday in Woolwich, or a few weeks ago in Boston, radical Islam is not only a threat in the Muslim world, but also here in our midst.

It is, in fact, the most direct threat to Western civilisation in the world today.

It is not enough for Muslim apologists to point to statements of regret after terrorist attacks.

They have to acknowledge the truth about their own past and present, the discrimination and cruelty towards non -Muslims,

women and slaves that have characterized Islam from its inception.

Mehdi Hassan is an exception.

I'm sorry.

In a brave and remarkable article in the New Statesman, he revealed what he called our dirty little secret,

that anti -Semitism in the Muslim community is quote routine and commonplace unquote.

It was brave because Muslims have fear reason to fear reprisals

when they speak out and it was remarkable because most Muslims are in denial encouraged by the pernicious notion of Islamophobia.

Because of that notion the police and other authorities were in denial about the rape

and exploitation of girls here in Oxford an evil

that was only exposed at their recent trial

but what other dirty little secrets might Mehdi Hassan like to

admit who else are Muslims at least of the radical persuasion

inclined to denounce in private what do they say about Christians

and other non -Muslims including atheists what about homosexuals

or women whose dress

or behavior is un -Islamic we know what Islamic states do to all these and many other categories of people.

They persecute and kill them.

They claim the authority of Islam, of the Koran, the Hadith, the Sharia and their own leading scholars.

100

I know there are other scholars who defy the Islamists.

101

I had the honour of meeting the late Zaki Badawi, the founder of the Muslim College, who fought against the influx of Saudi -funded Imams into British mosques,

102

who fought for Muslim integration and who denounced the fatwa against Salman Rushdie.

103

But, I'm sorry, Baddawi lost all these battles.

104

His leadership role has been usurped.

105

by Tariq Ramadan, who occupies a chair here in Oxford.

106

He comes from a very different tradition, that of the Muslim Brotherhood, the vanguard of Islamism.

107

To be blunt, Professor Ramadan is an Islamist wolf in sheep's clothing.

108

Beware of him.

109

A religion of peace has to practice what it preaches.

110

I'm almost done.

111

You only have to watch the news of persecution, war and terror from the Muslim world and beyond to find that religion of peace rings hollow.

112

Peace is not on offer to the rest of us except at a price that is unacceptable.

113

The price of submission, submission to the Islamists who increasingly dominate their fellow Muslims across the globe.

114

One of the Woolwich terrorists told onlookers he had committed his carnage

115

because he wanted to bring our troops back so we can all live in peace.

116

Our troops?

117

He had just butchered one of them.

118

That is not only murder, that is treason.

119

Until it is purged of the radicals who preach in its name, until we can feel safe on our streets again,

120

Islam does not deserve to call itself a religion of peace.

121

I urge you to oppose this motion.

122

Thank you.

เทคนิค Shadowing คืออะไร?

Shadowing เป็นเทคนิคการเรียนรู้ภาษาที่ได้รับการรับรองทางวิทยาศาสตร์ พัฒนาขึ้นสำหรับการฝึกนักแปลมืออาชีพ วิธีการนี้เรียบง่ายแต่ทรงพลัง: คุณฟังเสียงภาษาอังกฤษจากเจ้าของภาษาและพูดตามทันที — เหมือนเงาที่ตามผู้พูดด้วยช่วงเวลาห่าง 1-2 วินาที การวิจัยแสดงว่าเทคนิคนี้ปรับปรุงความแม่นยำในการออกเสียง ทำนองเสียง จังหวะ การเชื่อมเสียง การฟังเข้าใจ และความคล่องแคล่วในการพูดได้อย่างมีนัยสำคัญ

ฝึกพูดภาษาอังกฤษด้วยเทคนิค Shadowing จากวิดีโอ: Daniel Johnson | Islam Is Not A Peaceful Religion | Oxford Union

เกี่ยวกับบทเรียนนี้

เทคนิค Shadowing คืออะไร?