Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by scifes, May 10, 2009.
You believe. This is merely a question of faith.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
So far, the standard contradiction setup - harmless enough, but:
Mohammed did indeed "push" people to accept Islam - he was a military commander, and quite a bit of "pushing" was involved in his career overall.
The cadre of believers he (allegedly it was him) created did even more along those lines, and Islam was spread by the sword to far places and many initially unwilling people.
Which would be OK, if it were acknowledged - because it's happening now, as well, as part of normal human life. The notion that the less savory aspects of Islamic "tolerance" - tolerance of slavery in Niger, of genital mutilation here and there, of misogyny and oppression of women almost everywhere - are not the real Islam, come from these revisions of history and mythical invocations of purity, of a vision of Islam that ascribes to it all the virtues of the theologically refined understanding, and absolves it of the consequences of its basic political nature as a patriarchal monotheistic religion with a priesthood and a holy book.
The Quran, for example, is largely a set of threats, veiled and overt and implied and direct, page after page of them, against those who fail to join the True Believers or violate the edicts expressed therein. Among a small community of decent people, that is no problem. But in the hands of authoritarian government, backed by force of arms, other possibilities emerge - and the consequences of those possibilities are what the outsider sees, planet wide.
That does not mean that under the auspices of decent people, within the bounds of a community of the faithful, one cannot have a happy childhood. Just that crediting that happy childhood and community of the decent to the arcane, disputed, and unexemplified theological sophistications of such a religion is not persuasive to outsiders.
So this is nonsense:
He isn't wrong, he's Muslim and those are his Muslim beliefs, which he shares with millions of other Muslims.
Consider that Humanity, in the sense that we understand them now in terms of intelligence, has existed for at least 1000 centuries. There must have been at least hundreds of attempts to explain the world through religion. Every faith tends to be the mirror of the society that created it--as below, so above. History is littered with dead pantheons and defunct supreme deities.
Who's to say that in a thousand years from now, Jesus or Jehovah, or Mohammud or Allah, aren't going to be so much smoke on the wind, old prophets long-forgotten? What do you think is going to happen when Humans get out finally among the stars, and begin contacting other stellar cultures? That's one aspect of the future that the Star Trek people never seem to consider, I notice--they're a bunch of rationalists, it seems, and they appear to think that everyone out there will be as well. It could be that we have to confront people out there who want to convert the errant Human race to their way, and lift us out of the eternal darkness of our paganism.
My point is that you can't expect any faith to remain in place for ever; when we do start exploring the cosmos, we're inevitably going to stumble across ideas that startle us out of our torpor. Can you expect old ideas to survive the shock of the new? What society in history has remained completely unaltered in the face of close and prolonged contact with a power about whom they previously knew nothing?
I'll be honest. It sounds like you never read the Quran. Your post was a good laugh.
For those unfamiliar with Islamic history, they often let their biases get in place of neutral truth. It is a fact that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be to him) waged all his battles in defense of the state of Madinah. The Makkans persecuted the first Muslims and failed several attempts to take his life. He then emigrated to Madinah, and the first few years of the Islamic community's battles were waged against a foe who was superior is arms, allies, and troops by many times. After several Pagan and Muslim bedouin tribes allied with Madinah and people around the vicinity started embracing the religion, form as far away as Persia, Roman, Egypt, and India, the balance tilted in favor of the Muslims. After the Makkans broke the Treaty of Hudaybiyah by attacking a pagan tribe allied with the Muslims, this started the events leading up to the peaceful conquest of Makkah, in which no revenge was taken against any of its inhabitants and all were forgiven. In fact, forgiveness and peace were major themes in the Prophet Muhammad (peace be to him)'s victories. Soon after Islam became the dominant force in the Arabian peninsula, the Romans and Persians (who had been at war for hundreds of years) jointly attacked the new Muslim state in Arabia. The Romans and Persians both had vassal states in Arabia whom they relied on to keep Arabia disunited and to wage proxy wars against each other. The Muslim army than defeated the joint armies of Rome and Persia (the mightiest empires in that time). This was seen as a miracle, then the people all throughout the realms of the region began embracing Islam. In less than a hundred years, Islam had reached from Spain to India, from Nigeria to Central Asia.
The Roman and Persian empires fell do to their attack against the Islamic state, yet there is no proof that Islam 'spread by the sword' to other parts of the Islamic realm. The spread of Islam was largely carried out by traveling missionaries. Its success was in large part due to the concept of One God, which was foreign to many people of the world. Furthermore, many of the Christians of the Middle East and Africa embraced Islam as they saw it as the completion of the message of Prophet Jesus (peace be to him).
You confuse cultural practices with the religion. Statements borne from lack of knowledge and to further an agenda. Unbiased truth requires more research. Slavery may be present in some regions Sub-saharan communities, but yet it is not isolated to Muslims, the pagans and the Christians also practice this. Same thing with female genital mutilation, it is largely present in Christian and pagan societies, Islamic scholars have lost resisted it as a negative aspect of the native culture in African societies around the Nile. There was a thread concerning this topic, and I quoted a statement from the head of Al Azhar (oldest and respected Islamic university in the world) in Egypt which put this matter to complete rest. You are free to look this up for yourself. Furthermore, it is strange how those Westerners who always claim to support women rights, further support invasions and destruction of those same Muslim countries. Women's rights also includes human rights, something which is readily denied to women in the US prisons from Bagram to Abu Ghareeb (where women are kept as basically sex slaves, abused and raped by US soldiers). You should keep up with the story of Aafia Siddiqui, she was a doctor who was captured by US military and kept in Bagram airbase until she went mad from sexual abuse, including rape, and physical and mental torture. Yet these people claim to support women's rights.
Nothing but fear mongering on your part. The Quran states quite clearly, "There is no compulsion in religion." The punishments referred to in the Quran for those who reject the message are the punishments of the Afterlife. Allah swt declares that those who do not use the minds that which He has given them to discern truth from falsehood, and reject His message and attempt to shield others from the message by disinformation, they will be judged by Him according to that. Muslims are mere human beings, we don't claim to know the future, nor the ultimate destination of all human beings on earth. God shall judge concerning this, and He makes it clear that He is the Most Just of judges. "Not an atom's weight of deed, but shall be brought out (for judgment)."
Outsiders who know nothing of Islamic culture or religious practices. What knowledge have they of the internal community of the believers? As is more than apparent from your fear-mongering and outright Islamophobia on this forum, you are not a credible source of any information regarding Islam or Muslims. You attempt to discredit the words of Muslims who have grown up in their communities and readily entrenched in it, with nothing but mere conjecture. This is always the problem with self-ascribed Non-Muslim 'scholars' of Islam, they are nothing but tools in the hands of elements which wish to demonize and make life difficult for everyday Muslims.
I am more than capable enough to explain my own views. You, nor anyone else, have the right to explain my views. My posts are quite clear, they don't need to be interpreted or re-explained.
it's not me being gullible..it's you being ignorant and offensive..both to me and to your god who you know nothing about...
look, just because we believe in god doesn't mean we are irrational illiterate people missing logical thinking, believing in fairy tails and living in a dream..you should consider the possibility that it's all true and you're being gullible not to see it, that there's much more in this world which you don't know of which if put into consideration will make you see everything the way other do then judge it how you like....if you haven't relized yet ..i know what you know..but you don't know what i know, so my judgment is more reliable than yours...
Not with the Quran.
There are plenty of secular humanists out there starving and bombing children or cheering on the sidelines. Doesn't mean that we've redefined secular humanism to mass murder.
A "truth" that involves a god that doesn't like it when you drink beer (or smoke pot) will never be embraced by the overwhelming majority of the US. We like our dogs too. Edit: I forgot pork, just try and stop Americans from eating bacon. I don't lose any sleep over this nonsense catching on in the US, and I fully intend to continue not going to places where it is popular.
Islamic dogma will be swept away by time. Though there is a good possibility that it will be replaced by something even more objectionable. Humans are terrible, and are capable of believing in just about anything.
Because individuals wish to poison themselves and ruin their lives, doesn't make it acceptable even if the majority does it.
Muslims can have dogs.
Right, you don't care at all. That's why you didn't post in this thread.
Yeah, like Atheism.
Finish your thought please.
we can have dogs, just not inside the house.
Being a slave to dogma doesn't make it acceptable, even if the majority does it. And the overwhelming majority of those who consume alcohol, and occasionally a little marijuana, do not ruin their lives, but instead find that these things enhance them.
I've read your nonsense about them being "unclean animals", and numerous reports of problems concerning dogs and Muslims.
I am not concerned about Islam sweeping the west. I've posted in this thread to show my contempt for the nonsense you espouse.
It seems quite likely that there have always been non believers. There will likely always be non believers as long as there are humans. No doubt, there will come a time when there are no humans, so there will be a time when there are no atheists.
True. Some even believe that the above is an expression of tolerance.
These guys are so misunderstood!
So what? So were these
Making generalizng statements again?
The dogs' saliva is what is unclean as it can cause disease. Furthermore, Muslims are advised not to keep dogs in their homes due to health reasons. There is nothing against Muslims keeping dogs outside.
And millions here in the non-Muslim world keep dogs part time or exclusively in their homes with no problems at all. Score: book of ancient "wisdom" zero, common sense, one.
So islame is about being a spineless wuss before allah fvp?
Actually dogs, like most carnivores, have pretty clean mouths and saliva with anti microbial properties.
dog saliva contains lysozyme, an enzyme that lyses and destroys harmful bacteria. This means the enzyme attaches to the bacterial cell wall - particularly gram-positive bacteria - and weakens it, leading to rupture.
In a 1990 study done at the University of California, Davis, researchers found dog saliva killed E. coli and Streptococcus Canis
The Islamic definition of ritual purity 'taharah' is different. Furthermore, the dogs saliva is dirty, and especially for humans as it can transmit disease. You should do some more research. Liquids from animals or humans may carry diseases and transmittal of disease and bacteria is made easier this way. Considering dogs lick dirty areas of their body, one would believe this would make logical sense.
pretty much..yes..and that's good for you cause that's how you're supposed to be..
Separate names with a comma.