I hear from Ismus, and many others of the teachings of the Quaram, and it's infinete wisdom or so, BS, of course somethings are very general as in any primitive philosophy, however there exists many discrepancies and contradictions in the Quaram. I will point out a few of the links I've found while researching this, to discuss with Ismus. Anyone else is ofcourse welcome to join in. http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/realityislamic/conradiction.html As you may well understand some of these contradictions come from Christian view points, so I decided to use some of their arguments as well. http://www.faithdefenders.com/islam8.html\ http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5591/contra.htm http://www.digitalsword.co.uk/quran_contradictions_part1.htm I hope this is enough to get some good arguments.
What about the guy who wrote, "Why I am not a Muslim" (in the same vein as Bertrand Russel)? He is now a secular humanist, not a Christian. I think he has some kind of secularist site or something.
Dan... I used many links there, some were secularists, others were Christians, however I've also found some to be secularistmuslims, I didn't use that cause I was and are pressed for time, however I was trying to use as many views as possible. BTW, can't you tell I'm an atheist?.
First, I like to correct your spell: 1) I am ismu (= 'name' in arab language), not Ismus 2) It's Qur'an or something else sounds like that in your latin spelling. Nor Quara'am Ok, let's get into your points... I don't have too much time to read all of those, so I did read some of those. This is my conclusion / argument you ask for: Most of writings which attack on Qur'an I've ever read usually have some methods: - Cut some verses (not write entire lines) so it's blurs the meanings. Extreme example: "One who doing shalat (muslim) are looser", and not continue with "unless... (blah...blah...blah)". - Translate in english (or other language) and make their own interpretation from those english (or other language) words so it's again, blurs the real meanings meanings. For example; word in arab wich supposed to be translated as "fight" in the context of defense translated as "war". - The only make conclusion from literal translation. Actually, the right thing to do is take a look at right analyze from "tafsir". Tafsir is description to interprete better, according to the history (context) at the time of revelation of the verses. Hadist is history of prophet Muhammad which also contains many "right" description of the Qur'an. For example: When came on the command to commit war, they're not take a look at the history that it is a defense. - They don't know the tradition of society where and when the verses revelated. Such as number 7 also means "a lot". So when talking about 7 reward, 27 reward, 7000 reward, should be interpreted as "much", "much more", "much much more" etc. - They hide another fact to misleading people. My suggest is you should study it from "master" at first hand. Unfortunately, I'm not a master of Qur'an, yet. So you better as about it to the mosque near your neighbourhood. Or someone else here. But if you insist gonna ask to me, make it a few items, so perhaps I can ask someone else better than myself in my neighbourhood for you.
A little bit more... I like to add about inheritance share in your link. It only shows that the writer do not understant completely about inheritance sharing. There are more aspect (described in Tafsir and Hadist) to do it. There is no problem such as he said. I've learn how to count in highschool. He also forgot about ones who supposed to be "Wali" (I don't know it in English, sorry), and make different situation (there is a chance another one do not recive share) if the "wali" still alive.
Ismu.. Sorry for mispelling your name, ok!, however the word Qua'ram I've seen spelled so many ways it became confusing. Koran the same crap or what? There was a site I saw in my girlfriends computer, I've yet to find the time to get back to it again, however it was from secularists who were muslims, and followed islamic religion. So when I find them I'll post link. I know that I'm not going to change your mind, neither are you going to budge mine, anyhow I would like to learn a bit more of these other ancient text, that seems to be popular since 9-11, there are radicals in every religion, I've yet to read, hear, or see in the news of such radical atheists.
secularist islamic site... Ismu, check out this very interesting site, it kind of reminds me of America, separation of church & state, is their agenda, however there are very good arguments these people come up with. http://www.secularislam.org/ Have fun!!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Godless Can you let me know also when you find out? I'm also interested but mainly confused about the whole thing. Thanks, Teri
Godless We must have been posting simultaneously so disregard previous post. Keep up the links if you can, that one you just posted was very interesting. Teri
Re: secularist islamic site... I rather vague what you meant on this. Perhaps you point at "Islamic Skepticism". Well, these links answers most claims of contradictions in Islam, may be also answers your question: http://www.answering-christianity.com http://www.submission.org/answering-islam-org.htm http://www.islamweb.net/english/dawah/embrace/Embrace.htm http://galileo.spaceports.com/~samy/islamic_links.htm http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/quranerr.htm http://alhafeez.org/rashid/contradictions.html http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/ http://www.mostmerciful.com/reply-ans-islam.htm
Thanks for links... Ismu I've seen those links, and yes they do seem interesting however, for every argument they claim, secularists refute their assertions. 1. Islam, Muslim, the Koran, Qua'ran, all these are somewhat similar, they are irrational religions, like anyother religion. If the Qua'ran really tought peace, the buildings would still be standing. KNOW WHAT I MEAN!!!!!! However you like to quote your infamouse Qua'ran, so here it goes. Quaran controversies:Numerical contradictions There are many numerical contradictions in the Quran. Can God make so much error in doing simple calculations? How many days did it take to create Heavens and Earth ? Quran 7: 54 Your gurdian-Lord is Allah who created the heavens and earth in Six Days Quran 10: 3 Verily your Lord is Allah, who created the heavens and earth in Six Days Quran 11:7 He it is Who created the heavens and earth in Six Days Quran-25:29: He Who created the heavens and earth and all that is between, in Six Days The above verses clearly state that God created the heaven and Allah created the heaven and the Earth in 6 days. But the verses below stated- Quran 41: 9 Is it that ye deny Him who created the earth in Two Days ? Quran 41: 10 He set on the (earth) Mountains standing firm high above it, and bestowed blessing on the earth, and measured therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion, in FOUR DAYS… Quran 41: 12 So He completed them (heavens) as seven firmaments in Two days and … Now do the math: 2(for earth) + 4(for nourishment) + 2 (for heavens) = 8 days; and not 6 days Similar mistakes you can see in the verse: Quran 4: 11 - 12, and Quran 4: 176 in inheritance law. In these verses one can see the total property after adding all distributed parties adds up more than the available property, i.e., totals become more than 1 which are: 1.125 and 1.25. How come ? A gross mathematical errors, is not it ? Allah’s Days Equal to 1000 Years or 50,000 Years? Quran 22: 47 A day in the sight of the Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning. Quran-32:5: To Him, on a Day, the space whereof will be a thousands years of your rekoning Quran 70: 4 The angels and the spirit ascend unto him in a day the measure whereof is Fifty thousands years. So, which one is it? Is the day of Allah equal to 1,000 earth years or 50,000 earth years? Hey!! can't this quy count? Mohammad surely could have used a calculator, or kept a record of god's message in writing!!. I've got a few more; Creation of the Heaven and Earth Which one was created first? As you will see in the verses below, Allah at one time says that Earth was created first and another time he says that the Heaven was created first. Quran 2: 29 It is He who hath created for you all things that are on Earth; THEN He turned to the Heaven and made them into seven firmaments (Skies)…. Quran 79: 27 - 30 Are you the harder to create, or is the heaven that He built? He raised the height thereof and ordered it; and He has made dark the night thereof, and He brought forth the morning thereof. And after that, He spread (flattened) the earth Now, does it match modern science? Do you believe that, Earth was created first, after that, God created Heaven? Modern science tells us that? Or How come SEVEN firmaments (layers)? Modern science tells us that, actually there is no such thing Sky is no “roof” over us. It is only a space with no known boundary at all. These verses simply reinforce the ancient idea of ROOF over us which is called SKY, is it not so? How funny! Woa!! there's the old quaran again having it all wrong!!. now I will refer you to some interesting links K!!. http://humanists.net/avijit/article/myths_and_falacies.htm http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/af_ti.html See Ismu, for every positive you come up for your quaran, and your religion there exists opposition of those asserted claims, which in reality they don't stand in emperical evidence.
That was stupid I'm compelled to point out that had Christianity taught peace or love, a good number of buildings and a good number of people would not have been destroyed. Had Bolsheviks actually taught genuine communitarian principles, we'd all be red today. Had the United States actually respected its own Declaration of Independence and obeyed its own Constitution, much would be different. On the one hand, I think that humans do, in fact, tend to learn from history. It's a slow process, but it seems that people have to put themselves through certain processes in order to understand the necessary lessons. A child, for instance, who has never seen a real war might find it romantic, the way our culture teaches. The brave and gallant soldier, fearless, marching off to war. I don't need a whole lot of gore. Some grainy footage of a streetside execution in Vietnam was pretty much all I needed. Anyone ever see the picture of the little girl naked on the road, in shock because she just survived a napalm strike? In other words, I'm sure you had a point. Actually, strike that. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I can see that however.... The point is, that if the bible is fallible, according to muslins, and Islamic faiths, that the Quaran, is actually the true word of god, that the Quaran, only teaches peace and love and such. Bla, bla, bla, bla. Why on earht would there be such a phenomena as radical Muslins, or Islam?. What is it to be radical about? from a "Qua'ran" that only teaches peace & tolerance?. My point is that Islam, Muslins are just as irrationals religions as anyother.
Godless, Ismu ... um .. yeah. If it makes sense, good. A lack of a strong economy and a lack of education, when prolonged, raises bad interpretations of writings. We might look back to KalvinB's anti-Islamic tantrums in which he consistently ignored a simple difference between Christians and Muslims. A Christian is told to turn the other cheek. Most Christians have a problem with this. A Muslim is told to hit back until the aggressor stops hitting. Incidentally, most Christians seem to have a problem with this. Weak economy creates conditions of suffering, and suffering breeds resentment. Weak education allows bad interpretations of such standards as the Muslim response to violence, hence unnecessary aggression. The only reason for fundamentalist phenomena among a people is that it's eventually all they have left. I think given resource availability, even if it Christianity and Islam died off after the crusades, imbalances in economy and inconsistencies in education would still result in similar violence. People do learn. It just takes them a long time. I'm not sure that, had we eliminated Christianity or Islam, that the form of justification for violence (e.g. supremacy) would have disappeared with them. The easy answer, of course, is that we have no idea what "peace" or "love" means to God. In the metaphysical, it's an acceptable answer. What seems to be wrong with the violence is that it is morally wrong. Yet who, aside from human beings, gives a rat's behind about that? If a tree falls in the woods .... If a superplague got out of a government lab and everybody died, would the Universe care? No. If tomorrow we tortured and killed a million children, who outside of earthbound humanity would care? Living in the United States, the definition of peace seems to be, "That state of no fighting that exists after we've stomped everyone's asses into mudholes." My own parents' definition of peace was to lie and bury family scandals. Hell, I didn't know my dad was a legitimate alcoholic until I was 25. I was about that age when he had his second affair; it would be another year before I learned about the first. To them, peace was a term describing a visible state. It didn't matter if you were chewing yourself up inside. As long as we gave the appearance of a "normal" (read "Ozzie & Harriet") family. I think it's fair to say that any notion of peace or love is a purely human measurement. And such human measurements being subjective, the book can say what it wants. You know how hard it is to get a person to understand a simple sentence around here. Can you imagine if you were writing a holy book? There is also the writing method of the Koran. If I recall, it was received in disparate parts over the course of years by the Prophet. On the one hand, I don't see room for error, but on the other, I still laugh when I read Master Therion's notes regarding the deliverance of Thelema (I forget the specific Liber number). Crowley made an ass of himself disclaiming his role in it, and I think he was conscious of "errors" in other mystically-received books because he made several points about how Aiwaz instructed him to receive the text. I can't imagine Muhammed sitting in a cave taking punctuation and lexical advice from an angel. Rather, I can, but it would have to be a Monty Python film. I would encourage perception of "infinite wisdom" as follows, and this is a theory I pull out from time to time when appropriate. • Think for a minute as if humans were robots. You know, the brain is the mightiest computer and so forth. • When you transmit data to a PC, the OS occasionally makes certain errors in the data transmission or reception. This is a consistent problem that programmers and designers are trying to fix. • If humans were robots, we would make more of them on the factory line and then program them before operation. • Such is not the case, though, and data transmission is an ongoing, lifelong process. Operational instructions are compressed, economized, and optimized to contemporary needs. This changes both the nature of the data itself and the nature of its transmission and reception. • Thus, imagine if you can, the moment of perfect understanding that Muhammed endured. I say "endured" because any wise man knows that knowledge can increase suffering as well as reduce it. • If you were Muhammed (or even Jesus), could you transmit your data perfectly, and guarantee perfect reception? • Now that the data is received, can you guarantee proper assimilation by diverse individuals? • Count the data-transfer errors, omissions, and so forth. • Now, multiply by the intervening generations. I would assert that, on a metaphysical level, it is entirely possible that an "infinite truth" (read "ineffable truth" or "truth larger than knowledge") may well be present in the Bible or Koran. But no, at the popular level, there is no infinite truth. It's like subjective objectivity. Individuals' priorities determine the nature of perception and application. Bearing that in mind, we come all the way back to extended periods of weak economy and poor education. Get yourself a couple generations into it and wrong ideas rule. Armstrong, in the late pages of A History of God (and throughout Battle for God) explores the results of two famous purges in recent Islamic history. That of Kemal Ataturk and that of the Ayatollah Khomeni. In each case, after the tyrants purged society of clerics and intellectuals, what remained was a superstitious population with no experienced guidance. Fundamentalism rooted in that absence. I do believe, for instance, the Bible to be vitally and irreparably flawed. I have not studied the Koran enough to make that same conclusion, and do not look forward to 20+ years of similar relations as my experience with Christianity before making that judgment. Perhaps you're an expert on Islam, but if you're anything like me and acknowledge the limits of your knowledge, I would propose that you're not getting anything useful out of taking on such fundamentalist issues in any religion. You'll get two primary responses: those who are defending the primary religion against notions of fundamentalism, and fundamentalists themselves. In either case, it is difficult to make any progress. The value of any idea, be it religious, literary, governmental, or otherwise, lies in its application. I would go so far as to assert that one cannot know the fundamentalist splinter without knowing the primary body. Rather, one can only know as much about the fundamentalist splinter as they do about the primary body. One of those, it seems. And therein lies the better answers to the nature of Islam. Think about it this way: if one's primary interaction with Christianity is via abortion debates, homosexual votes, and fights about music lyrics, that is all they are dealing with. Think about that fundamentalist, young-earth, anti-abortion, gay-hating, anti-expressionist, misogynist, and otherwise spiteful stain on humanity that is so influential in American Christianity. It's a little like asking Vanilla Ice about music theory. ("Rap is the hardest music in the world to write because you have to make the words rhyme.") Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Don't challenge a religion by simply criticizing it. At that point, you're merely broadening the chasm and reinforcing the faithful's sense of righteousness. Rather, call a religion out on its application. I realize with Muslims that's problematic because the most of what we hear of Islam is about fundamentalist extremism. Believe me ... people will hand you opportunities. No, wait ... you don't have to believe me. I think you already know that. In my college dorm were a couple of guys from Singapore. One was Sikh. I remember once someone asked him a very basic question about something written in a holy text and he thought about it for a moment and said, "I don't know. I can't imagine when that would come up that I would have to think about it." If I give license to Islam regarding the accuracy of their book, it's because I have little reason to care about those aspects. Christians claim Biblical infallibility, and I do object to that. But I object because stupid ideas compel stupid people to object to science in schools, to object to civil rights, to object to human dignity, and to insist on supremacy. A teacher of mine once noted that if a work is good enough, it may or may not be regarded as art, but if a work is bad enough it won't matter. While this actually had more to do with "woman author" or "black author" labels, it still serves its point. If a Christian writes a law according to his biblically-assigned conscience, I could care less where it comes from as long as it's a good law. If it's a good law, it doesn't matter where it came from because it's a good law. If it's a bad law, then it does matter where it came from because that origin might hold the key to its fault. A little different of a process, but I hope you can see the analogy. In this country, though, Muslims aren't writing laws. They aren't f--king with my life or my freedom. 9/11? Beside the point. Does it matter if violence is in the name of God or country? Wait ... to be sympathetic with those more sympathetic to warfare than I, it would be best to try that again. If someone blows up the Sears Tower, for instance, in the name of God, does it make it any different than if they did it in the name of a country? There is a point to this digression .... What the hell was it? Oh, I'm justifying my regard for Islam. That's right. And poorly, by the look of it. But that's a basic line I draw. I'll bury the Christian book any day because of what it produces. I'll worry about the Koran, I suppose, when the Islamic world is up to date with the Western world and we're on equal footing. In the meantime, though, I don't expect to learn anything by addressing ... um ... I'm looking for a word ... damn ... um, by addressing stupid ideas. And on that note, I need a disclaimer. Ismu ... actually, reading back through your posts, I'm not sure the disclaimer is necessary, but I'll include it anyway. You'll notice I've used the word "stupid" and other less-than-positive terms to describe my opinion of the subject at hand. I hesitated each time because I need to make it clear that what I'm after is the larger issue of debating such ideas. As you note, you are not yet a master of the Koran, but you show wisdom in your responses. I do not, in fact, consider either you or Godless to be stupid. However, there are plenty of people out there who, as we saw with our Christian posters, are more than happy to entertain debates on this level and foster nothing more than division. So to put a question toward you that might (or might not) help my case, How important are the topic issues to the faith of the average Muslim? That is, when we get into "contradiction" ideas about the Bible, they're quite important to the people of the faith. Even Genesis, despite its messy narrative. I think of the aforementioned topics by KB and that's more of what I fear. I think issues of leadership, action, and responsibility--the conditions and justifications for violence--are much more important to any faith than how quickly God created the world. I cannot stress enough to all of our posters how important it is that we get past this level of subject matter and undertake more insightful issues. In this country, the accuracy of Genesis is only important because very stupid Christians make it so. I'm curious how much such ideas affect the Islamic world. I mean, Christians took a man to criminal trial in this country for teaching something other than the Bible. And while I'm thinking of Genesis ... does anyone know what a Children's Bible says about Onan? Sorry ... that just hit me. I wonder if that scene is illustrated .... If it's messy, it's because I really should consider sleep at this point. And I will do just that. peace & harmony ... really, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Re: Thanks for links... Godless, you are lying again?...Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I can tell you that you didn't bother looking at the above links ISMU gave you since those links explain the so called forced alleged errors in Quran. Above links give complete description of those so called errors and if you bother to looked at them you can tell that there are no errors and only errors are coming from the morons translating Quran without any knowledge of arabic. And even if they have knowledge these errors are very foney. Now lets try again go back and read those links again for errors and then come back please. By the way the site about secular islam, was of mirza Baig's views, A qadyani who happened to claim and prophet hood. Now don't tell me that you will take him seriously? Just like no one did to David Qurlash or Quraesh whatever the name was. More later.
Re: Thanks for links... I will reply to your post from home once the computer is fixed. Yes it is broken again. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! But anyways more to come. later.
Thanks Tiassa for insight... I know not to take things litterally or ofencive, one of the many things I've come to learn here at Sci. Your input & critiques are very much welcomed here, I've learned from you, and Chris as well in here. Quoate: "Weak economy creates conditions of suffering, and suffering breeds resentment. Weak education allows bad interpretations of such standards as the Muslim response to violence, hence unnecessary aggression. The only reason for fundamentalist phenomena among a people is that it's eventually all they have left." This is true, it all falls back on the fact of capitalism, reject it, and live with the consequence. The state has the power, the people are fooled with ancient religions, and the religion is the law of the land. this is the Muslin idealogy, though they do not have the power here in the US, they do however have power in countries of the Middle east. And today we see the consequences of such political idealogies. Though I do have my doubts of the American agenda, or what really caused an X-CIA opperative such as Osama bin Ladden to turn against America. Was it cause we screwed them up good, then left then to dry?. Perhaps, or was it that Americans saw that he would not be our puppet in the middle east?. Quote:"And while I'm thinking of Genesis ... does anyone know what a Children's Bible says about Onan? Sorry ... that just hit me. I wonder if that scene is illustrated". Funny, understand though that many here don't have the faintest idea without running to a dictionary to look at what "Onan" means. Good one BTW. Quote:"There is a point to this digression .... What the hell was it? Oh, I'm justifying my regard for Islam. That's right." True lets not loose focus of what we really are talking about. Islam, and Muslins fall as two different religions under the same book. The qua'ran, or was it the Koran? We here in the west are a little confused by this, or just me I think, however when I looked up the Quaran in Google, all thinks such as the Koran, Muslins, Islam, were suggested to look at, so yes it gets confussing filtering out the abundance of info in this topic matter. Marx, attacks and calls me a lyer, "do you know the amount of info Ismu posted in all these sites?." quite a bit yes I did look at some, and no I didn't look at all of the info of those I did look at. However I found then similar in their assertions about their religious believes such as the Christians assertions of thier believes. Which one is right?. Neither of them, If I'm to be logical, and use reason. I looked at sites which spoke mainly in the contradictions of Islamic believes, or muslin idealogy. Perhaps their lies my mistake. Though many of these were sites claimed to be Islamic converts, or Muslin converts.
And while I'm at it, here's another link... You quessed it, another contradiction site: http://www.touchet1611.org/KoranContradictions.html
Astrology ... Beer ... Trailer parks .... Godless Yeah, I know. But if it makes 'em go look it up .... A couple of notes. • First, I absolutely must insist. Islam is the religion. Muslims are the people. Koran is the book. Quran, Quaran, Qu'ram ... when you're transliterating 'twixt alphabets as well as translating languages, you lose certain phoenetics, and at that point I think you know what I'm after. As to the confusion of it ... well, for example: I'm 29 years old. I have lived my entire life among Christians and western atheists, agnostics, and otherwise. My whole life is set in a Western context. If, however, my life was set in a comparable Eastern context, what would I say of the west? Christianity? Well, there's two churches in the book; then there's the Catholics, then the Lutherans, Baptists, Quakers, Methodists ... (can I avoid continuing the litany?) It's just that fumbling the names of what one criticizes lends a sort of Rush Limbaugh mode to the diatribe. There's a smiley there ... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Actually, I would suggest the following toward thought: When someone puts a list of Christian one-liners in front of me, it's easy for me to see the problems because I"m vastly familiar with it. In addition to being able to read, I have 29 years among Christians. I understand their contexts to a certain degree. Half the contradictions in the Bible wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the stupid standards the unthinking faithful invent for their amusement. Experientially, I would say that I'm well familiar with the Christian insistence on certain forms of Biblical literalism, and from there we can leap to the difficulties of contradictions. However, I submit to you: look at the degree of intelligence one is opposing when rejecting Biblical creation. Look at the degree of superstition the faithful is struggling to accommodate. You and I both have known at least one Christian who didn't fit the mold, to whom such details of faith were unimportant because there were grander issues afoot (e.g Christian mercy and all that stuff we expect of them). To be honest, that's how it is with me and Muslims. I've never run across a Muslim to whom it is important whether God created the earth in 6, 7, or 8 days. When we engage Christianity on its issues and contradictions, is it fair to say that in the US, at least, Christians insist on meddling in public affairs? I have no reason to care what a person believes about the creation of the earth until they're pushing it at the school boards. Don't believe in abortion 'cuz God says not to? Fine with me. Now, leave it off the ballot until you can get a better reason than God. That sort of thing. Morality, law, and the right of conduct--the Christians challenge that, and we challenge the base upon which they mount their assault. Think of the trailer-park yokels (per stereotype) for a moment and consider that what you're addressing as contradictory is on par with this crowd. Sure, the appearance, at least, of contradiction might appear, but it's almost like you're pulling over to the side of the road to walk into a trailer park and challenge some guy. In the case of the Koran, I think you can get a higher debate on more intelligent issues than this. Did you happen to catch KalvinB's anti-Islamic topics a couple months back? He presented a lot of food for thought, but was so bent on making a superlative out of the situation that we never actually got around to that part of the discussion. Priorities, I guess. And that, actually, is why I'm even bugging you about this in the first place. Try it this way ... a friend of mine is a musician. Excellent sound tech, on his way to a studio engineering degree at the best school he could possibly go to for such a program. Classically-trained violinist. Capable drummer. Bassist. Guitarist. Perfect-pitch vocalist. It's funny how many people I know who didn't like him the first time they met him. But of those people, I can say that they all, upon learning that he was a musician, said something to the equivalent of, "Oh, yeah? Cool. I love music. Brooks & Dunn are my favorite, and then there's (insert band name) you know, the one that goes, (insert sound effect). God that sounds so cool!" You'd think that people would stop doing this to him about the time they turn, oh, fourteen. I can't figure it out. I cannot claim the scholarship of any person in here, but you've got people here willing to tackle issues of Mozart, the Chinese octave, or traditional schools of ballet. And you're handing them Bananarama. Look, I know I'm coming across like a barb-wire tumbleweed, but ... really ... I'm smiling as I type more than you might think, although if we were at a tavern, I'd probably be doing that annoying thing where I point at the bar and tap it with my finger over and over as I speak, punctuating rhythmically and only stopping to swill more beer. I'm sure that if I was an astrologer, I could find an excuse for it Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Bananarama?, LOL... That is basically what I see in this forums, so I do my best and act the freaking part. Like I did say, I've learned from you and few others, however for the most part, I've not seen much to impress me. Matching wits and smarts is not what I try to debate, I'm an hardcore atheist, one that does not believe in any religion whatsoever. So when I get an idividual such as Ismu, quoting the infamous quaran, I searched to learn more about this book, what I've presented is what I've found, if it sounds like trayler trash, and bananarama, it's because that was what was available. I do admit though perhaps I've bit more than I can chew, on this one cause it's a religion that I'm not very familiar with. None the less it's a religion based on mysticism, and it's rituals are as silly and stupid as any other religion I've seen. So when gettind down to it, these peace loving muslins, turn out to be just as falible in thier logic as any christian or babtist, catholic, whatever. You've mentioned that the violence may be caused by the lack of economic development in the middle east, and I may point out, as well by the way America may be taking advantage to aquire the natural resourses of these countries. The unfortuante thing is that these people "muslins" manipulate their youth through this religion in order to commit suicide and become martirs for Allah. So how can this book, which is the law of thier land, be so freaking holy?. Their is no holiness in suicide. Yet they are blinded by the love and devotion to this religion. And as the christian have their bible, these muslins have thier quaran thier bible. Have you ever heard of Catholic suicide bombers?, Christians? Jewish?. The only other fools of life that I've seen commit suicide is the Kamakazis, and this was also manipulated through religious believes. Plus the fact that they were promised their families would be well taken care of. When I started the thread my point was to demonstrate the inconsitencies, and contradictions of the quaran, I believe I've presented that. Take it as you will, if you find the time, search for yourself, and see what the trashy net brings you. Fact remains though, these muslins are a dangerous breed, they are a billion strong, and hundred of thousands radicals can be willing to blow themselves up for their f.ing allah!.
