Originally posted by majid86
Say what you want but it wont do you any good, Muslims arent going anywhere, so you can hate on them as much as you want.But then again you are a BNP/EDL supporter, so im not shocked at what you said.
Islam will ether have a reformation, or be diminished. There will never be a world Caliphate.
Originally posted by majid86
I respect Christianity & Judaism the most out of all the world religions but i would put Hinduism the least because of the Hindu Caste System which is totally unfair to any lower caste.
It's true. Go to India. They're really cruel to the poor, and EXTREMELY cruel to women.
Originally posted by majid86
I respect Christianity & Judaism the most out of all the world religions but i would put Hinduism the least because of the Hindu Caste System which is totally unfair to any lower caste.
You respect Christianity and Judaism but you hate white people.
What about white Christians or Judaists?
Originally posted by the ninjak
You respect Christianity and Judaism but you hate white people.
What about white Christians or Judaists?
Jewish and Christian beliefs are a core part of Islam.
Most of the prophets of Islam were Jewish:
Isaac/Ishaq
David/Dawud
Soloman/Sulliman
Jesus/Isa
Jacob/Yacub
Moses/Musa
Jonah/Yunis
Joseph/Yusuf
Lot/Lut
Job/Ayyub
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Islam bastardizes a lot of Jewish/Christian teachings and retells many of the parables to suit an Arab audience.
You can say that concerning Judaism/Christianity and the similarities of some stories with older "pagan" religions from ancient Egyptian, Sumerian, Babylonian, Hindu etc. mythologies.
But yeah, Islam's plagiarism is readily evident, since it came the last of the three.
Originally posted by majid86
Jewish and Christian beliefs are a core part of Islam.
Most of the prophets of Islam were Jewish:Isaac/Ishaq
David/Dawud
Soloman/Sulliman
Jesus/Isa
Jacob/Yacub
Moses/Musa
Jonah/Yunis
Joseph/Yusuf
Lot/Lut
Job/Ayyub
You didn't answer my question. But from your answer I guess I already know it.
Originally posted by inimalist
technically, it is also not a belief/ideal in Islam
It is. Anything Muhammad did falls under Sunnah and is to be emulated. He is an ideal, as Muhammad is considered al insan al Kamil...ie, perfect human being.
Qur'an even gives instructions of what the waiting period for pre-menstruating girl from engagement to marriage is. It's 3 months.
One more thing -
I find it so interesting that people try hard to make Islam compatible with democracy and western standards. Why? Why do people do this?
It clearly isn't. While I disagree with Islam, I also don't appreciate non-Muslims moulding it into whatever they want it to be. When non-Muslims do it, it's called ignorance, when Muslims do it, it's called taqiyya.
There is no 'fundamental Islam' and 'moderate Islam'. There's only one Islam. Muhammad's Islam.
There are moderate and fundamental Muslims, but Islam is only one.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
It is. Anything Muhammad did falls under Sunnah and is to be emulated. He is an ideal, as Muhammad is considered al insan al Kamil...ie, perfect human being.
in the most absolutist interpretations of the religion, maybe (and from the little I could find, really more of a Shia thing than anything else)
More modern interpretations suggest that either:
a) Muhammad was a man, not a divine being in any sense, and was therefore flawed like all other men and like all other men was a part of his own culture in ways we now know to be morally reprehensible.
b) Even though Muhammad might be perfect, man is not, therefore actions taken by the prophet might not be appropriate for sinful humans.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Qur'an even gives instructions of what the waiting period for pre-menstruating girl from engagement to marriage is. It's 3 months.
it is not surprising that a book of rules would dictate rules for common cultural practices of the time it was written. Even without falling back onto the two interpretations above, simply regulating something is not an endorsement of it. You might know better than me, but I wasn't aware the Qu'ran explicitly endorsed young marriage as a doctrine of faith, the same way the Bible can have rules about how slaves are to be treated without explicitly being seen to endorse slavery as the Christian way. This seems especially likely given the role of Aisha in the Qu'ran, ie, as a person of intense purity. idk, you might know some passages I don't.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
One more thing -I find it so interesting that people try hard to make Islam compatible with democracy and western standards. Why? Why do people do this?
It clearly isn't. While I disagree with Islam, I also don't appreciate non-Muslims moulding it into whatever they want it to be. When non-Muslims do it, it's called ignorance, when Muslims do it, it's called taqiyya.There is no 'fundamental Islam' and 'moderate Islam'. There's only one Islam. Muhammad's Islam.
There are moderate and fundamental Muslims, but Islam is only one.
I don't understand why you would let the religio-nationalist propaganda of a nation like Saudi Arabia or Iran define what Islam is?
Why not feminists or more progressive Clerical associations from around the Muslim world... like, your ideological allies here are OBL, the Saudi royal family and the grand Ayatollah.
The idea that Islam is this monolithic, unchanging thing that applies to all people irrespective of culture is nonsense
Originally posted by inimalist
in the most absolutist interpretations of the religion, maybe (and from the little I could find, really more of a Shia thing than anything else)More modern interpretations suggest that either:
a) Muhammad was a man, not a divine being in any sense, and was therefore flawed like all other men and like all other men was a part of his own culture in ways we now know to be morally reprehensible.
b) Even though Muhammad might be perfect, man is not, therefore actions taken by the prophet might not be appropriate for sinful humans.
it is not surprising that a book of rules would dictate rules for common cultural practices of the time it was written. Even without falling back onto the two interpretations above, simply regulating something is not an endorsement of it. You might know better than me, but I wasn't aware the Qu'ran explicitly endorsed young marriage as a doctrine of faith, the same way the Bible can have rules about how slaves are to be treated without explicitly being seen to endorse slavery as the Christian way. This seems especially likely given the role of Aisha in the Qu'ran, ie, as a person of intense purity. idk, you might know some passages I don't.
I don't understand why you would let the religio-nationalist propaganda of a nation like Saudi Arabia or Iran define what Islam is?
Why not feminists or more progressive Clerical associations from around the Muslim world... like, your ideological allies here are OBL, the Saudi royal family and the grand Ayatollah.
The idea that Islam is this monolithic, unchanging thing that applies to all people irrespective of culture is nonsense
I didn't leave up to ANYONE to define Islam for me. I defined it by myself by using my reading skills and my limited Arabic.
This is actually a lot more than majority of people who babble on about Islam did, and much much more than many Muslims did.
You should do yourself a favour, and instead of searching on Wikipedia about Muhammad, you actually read what Muslims wrote about him, way before the Saudis and way before Iran or anyone else had anything to say about it.
Read Sirat Rasul Allah, then we can have a really great discussion.
I also find it very offensive that you'd take upon yourself, without having read the Hadiths or the Sirat Rasul Allah (and I'd be bold to say, the Qur'an) to dictate to me which version of Islam is correct.
These materials were not written by Saudis, or Iranians or Taliban - they were written (supposedly) by the earlier followers of Muhammad, by those who spent time with him, fought with him and lived with him, by those who he (supposedly) called friends and companions and this is what is accepted as the truth. Sahih al Bukhari is called sahih for a reason.
Also, until you understand where Muhammad stands in Islam, this whole ''he might be perfect man but no human is'' is utter nonsense.
Have you ever been in a mosque? If yes, tell me what struck you as odd in regards to the arrangement (if anything)?
Originally posted by inimalist
so, your point is that you do share the same doctrinal beliefs as the most fundamentalist sects of Islam?
I share no belief in Islam at all, but I fail to find anything within the doctrine of the Salafis, Taliban or Saudis that is contrary to what Muhammad said or did, or what Qur'an commands be done.
Please, do tell me, which part of Saudi (Sunni) doctrine or Iranian (Shi'a) doctrine goes contrary to Muhammad's teachings?