Islam miracles.

I think the relationship of any religions moral code, compared to current realities, is problematic.
BTW, I am exceptionally curious about this "evidence" for Mohammed's unusual "proclivities." Unusual in terms of what? Of modern day practices, or in terms of his contemporary society? Any time I begin to think you might be something other than a bigot, you come up with comments like this. Sad

0 Replies

Quote:

You picked two words "eradicate islam" (a religion) out of an entire paragraph which provided context and immediately associated it with "eradicating groups" (people). Since you have also stated that "religion is an intellectual construct. Nothing more" I do not see why you have gone ballistic over eliminating an intellectual construct by means of education about that construct. Either your biases are getting in the way or there is a reading comprehension problem.

nice one mesquite

0 Replies

qkid wrote

Quote:

The closest person I see to the topic is Steve. He said that the Quran is falsifiable (can be prooven false). And if it isnt, then it is the ultimate truth.

Er did I? Look Qkid, thats very kind of you but I'm not sure I did say that. I dont want you to think you are being picked on here. And certainly not by me. I respect your sincerely held religious beliefs. All I ask is that you understand that religion was and still is for many people a way of explaining the incomprehensible. And that science does just the same thing, except to most people its the methodology and detail which are incomprehensible, rather than the object.

0 Replies

Quote:

BTW, I am exceptionally curious about this "evidence" for Mohammed's unusual "proclivities." Unusual in terms of what? Of modern day practices, or in terms of his contemporary society? Any time I begin to think you might be something other than a bigot, you come up with comments like this.

And anytime Hobitbob that I begin to think you know what you are talking about, you say something which makes me suspect you are a politically correct fascist. Very Happy

0 Replies

Hmmm...so lets see if I have this straight... by refusing to label a religion with such simplistic terms as "good" or "bad"; by calling for a discussion of textual sources instead of personal opinions; by considering a website that states one of its purposes if the "elimination" of a religious faith to be bigoted; by my distaste for the denigration of a group of people for religious (or other) reasons; and for my refusal to engage in anachronistic debate over what were common practices in the pre-modern era, I'm the fascist? How old are you guys, anyway? Rolling Eyes

Which one of us made the comment that the subjects of discrimination have brought it on themselves for their failure to assimilate? Which one of us posted a website calling for the elimination of a religious group? Which one of us is referring to a person who lived over one thousand years ago a pervert for not living up to 21st century standards? I think you guys need to do some serious considering fo your own positions before you dare to criticize anyone else's position.
At least Qkid has an excuse...he's a loony!

0 Replies

hobitot

I agree with you about "religion" in general and Islam in particular !

An elementary Google search will yield "evidence" on many issues...and thanks for the compliment of thinking I might be other than "a bigot". I am sure you are other than "a pedant". Laughing

0 Replies

Google search? How about valid sources, such as academic journal articles, or monographs? I trust the internet less than I do you. Wasn't it one of Qkid's ideological clones who was attempting to "prove" the bible with links to websites that supposedly showed the bible was "right?"

0 Replies

Hobitot,

I too have problems with the concept of a "serious" academic article which concerned itself with Mohammed's numerous wives and legendary sexual prowess (of what was it ..."thirty normal men" ?)
We could have an equally irrelevent goose chase round King Solomon's "365 wives". Credibility of source is peripheral. The point at issue is that Muslims tend to deny any historical data which does not sit well with their rosy picture of "Mohammed as a chosen mouthpiece of God" and to eliminate dissenters. I don't see other religionists issuing fatwas. We are talking actualities here, not academic historical relativism.

0 Replies

Quote:

Which one of us made the comment that the subjects of discrimination have brought it on themselves for their failure to assimilate? Which one of us posted a website calling for the elimination of a religious group? Which one of us is referring to a person who lived over one thousand years ago a pervert for not living up to 21st century standards?

Not me! I said you gave the impression of being a politically correct fascist.

But whoever it was who said those bad things above should come clean now, for their own good.

0 Replies

truth
Why don't we proclaim Moses or Jesus pederasts and see how long we survive? One thing is highly probable: we will not publish our proclamation in a peer-reviewed journal. How about a tabloid?

0 Replies

hobitbob,
I think that Steve meant that pc fascist comment tongue in cheek judging by the emoticon.Well I got a chuckle out of it anyway. Why the thin skin?

To back up a ways,and review this current exchange, it started with Steve making this obvservation

"Christianity is nonsense
Judaism is racist
Islam is violent"

to which you replied with
"Islam is no more or less violent than any other faith (This includes Buddhism)."

which I thought was a rather outragious statement and I replied with

"I ordinarily agree with your positions hobitbob, but that was a rather provacative statement which I assume was meant to generate questions, so I will bite. Does Buddhism have anything in it's writings or teachings that is as gross as taking an old lady, having her tied between two camels and driving them apart until she is wrent in two as Islam does? Does any other religion than Islam have their religious leaders issue death directives such as Khomeni did, or even more recently in Nigeria? Does any other religion today still practice barbaric acts such as stoning to death for adultery?"

That you have yet to reply to any any of the three questions above says much.

You did provide an example of a buddhist sect that was violent, but when I noted that that did not address my question, about writings or teachings you bowed out and said to check with Asherman. Yet you are the one "calling for a discussion of textual sources instead of personal opinions". The website that you ranted about and the article about child marriage was loaded with quotes from the religious writings which are used as examples of how to conduct oneself.

In today's world it is what is currently being tought by today's religions that is what is important. All of the abrahamic religions have violent and archaic writings. However it is only islam that has entire countries with their laws based on these ancient writings,laws that are not subject to changing times or advancement of knowledge.

0 Replies

QKid wrote:

First of all let me say that we have reached far past the topic at hand. The topic was "Is the Quran the Word of God". All these questions you guys are hitting me with does not have to do with the topic. Second, I did not start studying Islam until last summer. Before that I really didnt know much, only the basics. I certainly did not know about many of the questions you guys are asking me. And all of them can be answered in great detail by scholars. I am not even close to being one. So I must say that I am not able to answer all the questions that are posed. Now to some questions.

hobitbob wrote:
Qkid, there is little doubt Mohammed's marriage to Aisha was consummated. This was not an unusual practice for dynastic alliances in the seventh century. As for your insistence that the Q'uran remains unchanged, you remind me of the loonies who insist that Jesus spoke English because the King James version of the Bible is in English (of cource, that puts you up there with Tom DeLay, so you are in distinguished, if malevolenbt, company!). I'm pretty much through with this thread, since between your "brain off, full speed ahead" fundamentalism, and the "Islam must be eradicated" bigotry of others on this thread, there is no longer any room for reasonable discussion.

Hobit,
You claimed that the Quran has been changed. I said no and I even provided the proof. Whether you choose to accept it is up to you. But then again you claim that the Quran has been changed and you accuse me of a looney. You claim things with NO EVIDENCE and when you see the evidence, you wish to just thumb suck and ignore it. If this thread is useless its because you really dont have anything to say and you keep claiming things with no evidence.

fresco wrote:
Qkid

<<[Scriptural Evidence] Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64: Sahih Bukhari [themost venerated and authentic Islamic source]Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then
she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).>>

Dates commonly accepted by scholars: Birth Muhammad(570), birth
Aisha(614 or 615). Bethrothal(620 or 621), Consummation of marriage(623
or 624). In particular the "consummation" of marriage is said to have
taken place after the hidjra in Shawwal 1 or 2.

What's your source ?

I really dont know much about this so I will not say anything. But I know you can find the answer. But anyway this question is not a part of the topic. How did we get here?

Portal Star wrote:
QKid wrote:

Portal Star wrote:

You can test your religion to see if it is non-falsifiable - try to deny part of it and say it is untrue. Are you allowed to do that? Will it condemn you or make the rest of the reading incorrect? Now try to deny all or half of it and say that it is untrue. How does the religion/government punish you for your dissenting beliefs?

Yes the Quran was written by men, I am not saying that. I am saying the Quran even though written by men, was revealed to prophet Muhammed pbuh through the angel Gabriel. And this revelation is the exact words of God. The Arabic words are the exact words of God. Do you know how huge this claim is?? I want all of you to think if the Quran is the exact words(verbatim) of God, then what does it actually mean. How must the language be, shouldnt it be the best work of literature ever then, etc???

This is a real funny question. Cmon. You know what I mean by He created everything. After He did that, He gave us free will, I think you know whats the answer to this.

The Quaran was written by men. What I am saying is that it was only written by men. If g-d wanted to do somthing he/she/it would not have to only use methods that men can. He/she/it would not have to leave no evidence behind of their intervention. It was men who wrote those books, and people who wrote all the other religious books in the world. There was no divine ear whispering involved. You are worshipping the words of men.

Correct me if I am wrong: Your religion is non-falsifiable - you will be punished if you disbelieve with all or part of it. You wil go to hell if you don't believe, under this system. That is the punishment for questioning - burning for the rest of eternity - under this religion you chose.

The reason you are given the "free will" answer is because the people who tell you about this g-d they made up want you to belive in it. They want to scare you into behaving like they want you to - in a way they think is a good way for you to behave. In order to prevent you from noticing that your life is just like everyone else's life on this earth, whether or not you believe in this g-d, they use the concept of free will. They tell you if somthing bad happens, it is a test. If somthing good happens, it is his blessing. These are not bad outlooks to have in life, but think about it. Would it be possible for good and bad things to happen without a g-d? Isn't "free will" just a way of explaining why bad things happen to good people even though their g-d is supposed to be watching over them? Bad things happen to good people because there isn't a moralistic g-d watching over them. They are responsible for their own lives and destiny.

First of all, you are an athiest, I think. So how can you even make judgements on how God should reveal when you dont even believe in Him?? This does not make sense. Even I won't question why God did not reveal in some other way. Who are you to question His way of revelation? And the free will thing is not because of what people made up, it's in the Quran. The Quran also states that this whole life is a test to see if we worship God, and we worship God by taking heed to what it says in the Quran and what prophet Muhammed pbuh said and did. It is not from what people made up. Its in the Quran.

Look guys, these questions are great but it is not the TOPIC. Foreget those questions for now. It seems as if you guys dont have anything to say about the topic so you switch it by asking other questions. I still dont see how you people can say the Quran is not the words of Allah.

The closest person I see to the topic is Steve. He said that the Quran is falsifiable (can be prooven false). And if it isnt, then it is the ultimate truth. So then how would/can you prove the Quran to be falsifiable??? Not by denying part of it, and say it is not true. But by analyzing it.

My personal beliefs don't matter. What matters is what is true and what is not true, and how we conduct our lives. As I've stated before, if you life a good life and don't hurt others, I don't care what you believe in.

But that doesn't make it true.

If you can't break away from your beliefs enough to even question the fact that they might be from men only, I cannot help you understand what is truth and what is not. Truth comes from questioning and obervation, not from blind faith.

0 Replies

Steve,

I brought up the "non-integrationist issue" and the "denial of the existence of a pedophile issue" as specific to Islam. The second undermines the rationality of the first from the point of view of moralistic internal coherence, and hence is an argument against hobitbob's "equivocation" position. The words "pervert" and "brought it on themselves" were not used by me.

I had previously stated that my atheistic position prompts me to argue that all organised religions tend to be pernicious (devisive and authoritarian) and I hold Islam to be a current specific example. I concede that in past times other religions have provided equal examples of perniciousness.

0 Replies

Some examples of religious violence in South Asia.
To Kill Demons is Desired
Targeting of Religious Minorities
Attacks on competing religions hloy place in South Asia Indoctirnateing religious intolerance, hatred in religious schools in South Asia
What Religion has a monopoly on religious violence?

0 Replies

hobitbob wrote:

Some examples of religious violence in South Asia.
To Kill Demons is Desired
Targeting of Religious Minorities
Attacks on competing religions hloy place in South Asia Indoctirnateing religious intolerance, hatred in religious schools in South Asia
What Religion has a monopoly on religious violence?

I see a lot of articles dealing with violence from hindu groups. The one mention of Buddhism was about a cult supposedly derived from elements buddhism, hinduism, and christianity. That does little to support your statement "Islam is no more or less violent than any other faith (This includes Buddhism)." Nothing in the above responds to these questions that I posed in response to your statement.
Does Buddhism have anything in it's writings or teachings that is as gross as taking an old lady, having her tied between two camels and driving them apart until she is wrent in two as Islam does?
Does any other religion than Islam have their religious leaders issue death directives such as Khomeni did, or even more recently in Nigeria?
Does any other religion today still practice barbaric acts such as stoning to death for adultery?"

You bypass the difficult questions just as much as Qkid.

0 Replies

No, I admitted I did not know. There is a difference. The articles about Hindu violence have nothing to do with your question. The articles about Hindu violence are in respose to the prevailing sentiment that Islam is the only religion that currently fosters violence.

0 Replies

However:

Quote:

Does any other religion than Islam have their religious leaders issue death directives such as Khomeni did, or even more recently in Nigeria?
Does any other religion today still practice barbaric acts such as stoning to death for adultery?"

It would seem that the answer, at least for Hinduism and Christianity, is yes.

0 Replies

I agree that christianity has a violent past and the bible has not been updated, therefore the danger of fundamentalism. That is the reason for this post. I still fail to see how you can answer those two questions with "It would seem that the answer, at least for Hinduism and Christianity, is yes."

Do you have an example to equal Khomeni's fatwa against Rushdi or Iran, Nigeria's law and punishment for adultry?

0 Replies

You mean, other than the listed examples of Hindu leader's calls for violence, or people like Baptist minister Fred Phelps' campaigns? How about Pat Robertson's call for the bombing of the State Department?

0 Replies

Quote:

The articles about Hindu violence are in respose to the prevailing sentiment that Islam is the only religion that currently fosters violence.

I never said Islam is the only violent religion.

Violence often flares up up between Hinduism and Islam. Judaism and Islam. Christianity and Islam. Between different Islamic sects. Between Islam and apostates of Islam. Violence is done to those who transgress Islamic law, and those participating in Islamic ritual. And when 190 Spanish workers and students are slaughtered in Madrid and 1000+ injured, it seems Islamists are responsible.

0 Replies

Islam miracles.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know