One planet, one religion

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
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?

I guess I just don't see religions in the same way you do...

surely you wouldn't argue that all forms of Orthodox and Protestant beliefs aren't Christianity because they reinterpreted or disagreed with various doctrinal issues.

There was hardly anything that could have been called a single Islam at the time of Muhammad's death.

pastafarian obviously.

Originally posted by inimalist
I guess I just don't see religions in the same way you do...

surely you wouldn't argue that all forms of Orthodox and Protestant beliefs aren't Christianity because they reinterpreted or disagreed with various doctrinal issues.

There was hardly anything that could have been called a single Islam at the time of Muhammad's death.

I can't and I don't argue that Orthodoxy, Catholicism or Protestanism aren't Christianity?

As I understood, you're suggesting that Saudi way is not true Islam, or that Iranian way is not true Islam, but westernised version is the real Islam.

Shi'a, Sunni, Ahmadis, Sufis...etc... They're different sects (although Sunnis are overwhelmingly higher in number) but fundamentals of all those are the same - there are two things that are not questioned or disputed within Islam: Muhammad and the Qur'an.

Everything else are nuances, like who was rightful Caliphate, did Abu Bakr instigate his daughter Aisha to poison Muhammad so he could assume power or did the Jewish woman do it, should we celebrate Muhammad's birthday or is it haram, is it ever permissible to listen to music or play an instrument or not...etc, etc.

Islam is unique, as it is the only major religion that has explicit instructions on how to deal with the unbelievers. It is also the only religion that has a full political system set up and full social system, from how you wash yourself, to how you wipe your ass (I'm not making this up, there's a right way to wipe your ass after number two that will please Allah), to how you eat and have sex and such.
Allah hates when you yawn but it's ok when you sneeze and laughing at those who fart is forbidden.
(Don't believe me, you can check all this out - quranexplorer.com)

Don't take Jews or Christians for friends, apostasy is punishable by death, Jews and Christians are pigs and monkeys, they should be made to pay tax, lives of Jews and Christians are worth nothing...bla bla bla..etc etc etc.

Now, many many Muslims (thank goodness) do not follow this ridiculousness, especially in the west or more liberal Islamic countries, but not following certain parts of religion that is considered ''most perfect'' can't be considered the 'real Islam'.
We only consider it like that in the West, because it fits with our moral values and we like that.

actually, my argument is, if you want to break it down to a single sentence: There is no true Islam

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
There's a right way to wipe your ass after number two that will please Allah

Rule 34

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I can't and I don't argue that Orthodoxy, Catholicism or Protestanism aren't Christianity?

As I understood, you're suggesting that Saudi way is not true Islam, or that Iranian way is not true Islam, but westernised version is the real Islam.

Originally posted by Digi
Rule 34

I just had a visual. Noooooooooooooooooooooo!

Originally posted by Omega Vision
You have a funny way of reading things.

Either support the claim you're making, or refrain from commenting. Otherwise, it looks like genuine trolling.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness

Either support the claim you're making, or refrain from commenting. Otherwise, it looks like genuine trolling.

But on the real, nowhere did ini imply what you accuse him of implying. His whole comparison with the Christian sects was to illustrate that divergences in doctrine and interpretation don't mean that there are right or wrong ways of embracing/following a faith.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
That wasn't a claim, that was an opinion. Opinions don't need to be supported. No need to be so testy.

But on the real, nowhere did ini imply what you accuse him of implying. His whole comparison with the Christian sects was to illustrate that divergences in doctrine and interpretation don't mean that there are right or wrong ways of embracing/following a faith.

Opinion on what? If I read it wrong, tell me where I got it wrong. If I did, then I made a a long rant at inimalist...

It's not my intention to be testy. Sorry if it came across like that.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Opinion on what? If I read it wrong, tell me where I got it wrong. If I did, then I made a a long rant at inimalist...

It's not my intention to be testy. Sorry if it came across like that.

Though ini has been pretty even keeled about this...there are a few points where I would have certainly snapped at you in his position.

...Also it's hard to take him seriously when he doesn't have an Avy uhuh

Edit: "Senior Member" pfft...yeah right. Without an avatar?

EDIT: I worked so hard on my rant, and now i've deleted it.

So...I will go eat something now. Cos...I deserve it.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
That is the general view of Westerners towards Islam, due to Christianity and Judaism not having any particular 'culture' attached to it.

This is kind of my point all along - people keep thinking that Islam is of the same calibre as the Judeo-Christian tradition, when in fact, it really isn't.
Islam isn't just a religion, it is also a political and social system. Political and social systems are part of the religion and those are not questioned as those are considered to be from God.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I'm not about to get into a long debate with you over this, but I will say that you sound like you've never been to the American Bible Belt. 😛

Nope, I haven't. To be honest, not sure I wanna go. ermm

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Nope, I haven't. To be honest, not sure I wanna go. ermm

They'll be polite and proper and smile but you'll know from what they don't say and how they avoid you whenever they can that you're an enemy.

It's...creepy.

Originally posted by inimalist
actually, my argument is, if you want to break it down to a single sentence: There is no true Islam

Unfortunately people will fight like hell to avoid believing that there is not a "one true" such and such (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Wicca, Buddhism) mainly because most sects style themselves as such.

Originally posted by Digi
Rule 34

the rule is actually somewhat interesting.

essentially, you are supposed to clean yourself (wipe ass) with one hand, and eat/greet people with the other.

Given these were a nomadic and desert people, this makes a lot of sense. If there is no water to clean one's hands, this would do a lot to prevent the spread of disease.

I actually think it shows a great deal of insight that during a time when Europeans still thought there was no need to wash one's hands these cultures had developed social customs aimed at disease control.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
...Also it's hard to take him seriously when he doesn't have an Avy uhuh

Edit: "Senior Member" pfft...yeah right. Without an avatar?

actually waiting on a name change to set up a new style

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Unfortunately people will fight like hell to avoid believing that there is not a "one true" such and such (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Wicca, Buddhism) mainly because most sects style themselves as such.

ya, I hear that, I guess all I'm trying to say is that has never been the case with any faith (afaik at least), especially not Islam. I guess, outside of what people believe and the way religion and culture interact, I don't think there really is such thing as religion. Like, what would be a "pure" faith in the first place?

Islam changed as quickly as it spread, with major theological questions still not settled even at the time of Muhammad's death. Saying one has the "true" faith is a way for leaders to justify their actions and policies, imho at least.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I just had a visual. Noooooooooooooooooooooo!

You're welcome.

😊

Originally posted by inimalist
the rule is actually somewhat interesting.

essentially, you are supposed to clean yourself (wipe ass) with one hand, and eat/greet people with the other.

Given these were a nomadic and desert people, this makes a lot of sense. If there is no water to clean one's hands, this would do a lot to prevent the spread of disease.

I actually think it shows a great deal of insight that during a time when Europeans still thought there was no need to wash one's hands these cultures had developed social customs aimed at disease control.

How in Christ did you turn a porn joke into a learning moment?

Thanks. I guess.

😐

Originally posted by inimalist
the rule is actually somewhat interesting.

essentially, you are supposed to clean yourself (wipe ass) with one hand, and eat/greet people with the other.

Given these were a nomadic and desert people, this makes a lot of sense. If there is no water to clean one's hands, this would do a lot to prevent the spread of disease.

I actually think it shows a great deal of insight that during a time when Europeans still thought there was no need to wash one's hands these cultures had developed social customs aimed at disease control.

actually waiting on a name change to set up a new style

ya, I hear that, I guess all I'm trying to say is that has never been the case with any faith (afaik at least), especially not Islam. I guess, outside of what people believe and the way religion and culture interact, I don't think there really is such thing as religion. Like, what would be a "pure" faith in the first place?

Islam changed as quickly as it spread, with major theological questions still not settled even at the time of Muhammad's death. Saying one has the "true" faith is a way for leaders to justify their actions and policies, imho at least.

There's the hand rule, as in, with your left hand, but the actual butt wiping is to be done with stones.
Here's the weird thing, there's actually a proper number of stones you need to use - I think it has to be an odd number...7 or 9. I'll have to check that, cos I forgot.

Originally posted by Digi
You're welcome.

😊

How in Christ did you turn a porn joke into a learning moment?

Thanks. I guess.

😐

😂😂😂 Porn joke into argument. I lol'd.

Originally posted by inimalist
the rule is actually somewhat interesting.

essentially, you are supposed to clean yourself (wipe ass) with one hand, and eat/greet people with the other.

Given these were a nomadic and desert people, this makes a lot of sense. If there is no water to clean one's hands, this would do a lot to prevent the spread of disease.

I actually think it shows a great deal of insight that during a time when Europeans still thought there was no need to wash one's hands these cultures had developed social customs aimed at disease control.

Do you think the earliest terrorist used this rule to their advantage by secretly switching the use of hands and then going on a greeting jihad?

Hahahahahaha! Greeting jihad.