Catholicism and Women

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
41

Scythe, you are a naked old man waving a toothpick at a dragon at this point. Take noetician’s advice and refrain from any further indignance of your reputation as a good thinker. I will repeat my post to you since you have ignored it. Take it with good will rather than to waste more of noetician’s intellect on trivial issues… You have an opinion and you intend on finding information to substantiate it. You should operate in the converse: let truth and reason be your guiding priciple. It is good.

Scythecain, you have missed so many of noetician’s points you are almost unworthy of her reply. But I have a tip for you: Since you seem to have a huuuuuge problem with something very simple, I will offer you a gift of clarity. That is, 1. you constantly, in your mind overlap and confuse 1) what happens in the middle east with 2) Islam. And when noetician says something like “Islam strictly forbids the rape of women” or whatever, you reply with something like “oh yeah, it happened in Saudi Arabia yesterday so there! Islam DOES permit it.” You are not entitled to your claim in all situations like this.

Second, I will repeat to you what I said to you in the “FOR ALL YOU LEFTIES” thread in the Rant House in response to your describing Mohammad as

You are inappropriately committed to your opinions on matters that hold truth value. Needless to say, your lack of study is made evident by your contentions and you are often on the wrong side with regard to interpreting the Qur’an and the teachings of Islam. You have not yet begun a real debate on the religion since you have not sufficiently, or even insufficiently learned it and thus not even understood its principles. You create positions for Islam that do not exist and argue against them citing some practices in the pan-Arab world.

Would you ever try to engage in a debate against Kant’s metaphysics without reading Critique on Pure Reason? You would be foolish to do so. Further, would you not seek guidance in your study of this most complex text e.g. Ph.D’s in philosophy, university courses, directed studies, etc.? Most of any academic calibur would encourage you to do so. But you attempt to mount an assault on Islam in such an undignified and unacademic way. You haven’t any real knowledge on the religion which you’ve glaringly affirmed. Your claims are false. You are not entitled to draw your conclusions therefore. You were the first person I engaged in conversation with on this website. You might not remember but you claimed there is no God. I told you that Descartes, Aquinas, and Anselm would have a good reply for you and asked you for your argument against God so that we may engage in a debate. You did not provide one. So I offered Descartes’ proof for the existence of God to give you a platform by which you can mount a rebuttal. You replied with some senseless remarks that exhibited that you did not even understand Descartes’ argument. To refresh your memory: ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/vi … t=#1647083 You have made claims that do not apply to your opponents positions since your opponent does not hold the positions you attack. A friendly encouragement to study something before attacking it. You are playing on a chess board but following the rules of checkers. You are playing alone. You are a lone man in a field at night, in the dark sword in hand, you swing your sword violently, uttering insults to your enemy. You fight no one. No one is there scythecain. It is cold, and you are naked.

42

I ignored your post avicenna because it in no way relates to what we are talking about.

43

The fact that AD did not waste his time refuting your illogical arguments to no avail is not indicative of a lack of relevence on his behalf. On the contrary, that was the most relevant post you could read. It directly addressed your arguments, your argument structure, and your foundational knowledge–the base of all of our posts. Furthermore, he stated what thirst and I have both been encouraging you to do: read. Gain knowledge on a topic before you attack it. Yes, his post was advice to you rather than nit-picky argumentation, but that is no reflection of its relevence. I, too, encourage you to re-read his post, whether or not you choose to comment on it. It’s good advice.

44

Africa 308,660,000 27.4%
Asia 778,362,000 69.1%
Europe 32,032,000 2.8%
Latin America 1,356,000 0.1%
North America 5,530,000 0.5%
Oceania 385,000 0.0%
World 1,126,325,000 100%

islamicweb.com/begin/muslim_distribution.jpg

you’ll see that most of the african distribution of Islam is in Northern africa and most of the asian Islam is in the countries that.

these are the countries in the “middle east” which compromises countries from Africa and Asia.

Afghanistan
Bahrain
Egypt
Iran
Iraq
Israel
Jordan
Kuwait
Lebanon
Libya
Oman
Palestine
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Syria
Turkey
United Arab Emirates
Yemen

looking at the map (and realizing it’s from 15 years ago!) and saying that the

is not such an incorrect statement. If they had the “percentages” the middle east is probably at least 95% or greater Islam.

so equating actions of Islam with actions of middle eastern governments or people? far fetched? i don’t think so.

The stretch your making (noet, and avicenna) is that because I’m equating these actions with Islam it instantly means ALL muslims are bad. It doesn’t just like not all christians are alike or even practice the same moral or ethical guidelines.

Now in one of your posts in the other thread avicenna you incorrectly stated that the middle east only accounts for 20% of the total Muslim population. looking at these figures it’s probably closer to 60% or greater.

that’s not even what I said you could at least quote me within context. but since you didn’t it nicely proved my point of how you can take words that would “seem clear” to me and interpret them completely differently.

Really that’s the whole point I’m trying to make. While your version of Islam and your interpretation of the Quran says “raping women is bad” someone could interpret that verse from the Quran as meaning they can have forced sex with their wife. You know it’s true just as I do. You can also claim that they are not really Muslims, because they are following a false interpretation. They’ll make the same claims towards you. It’s all a matter of opinion and that’s the danger of believing any book is the divine word of god.

Historians have KNOWN that Mohammed was a general of his believers LONG before any terorist attacks would motivate a revisionist version of the history.

the question is, since your an atheist why do you care how mohammed is viewed? clearly since your an atheist you know he’s a false prophet right?

that’s rich. are you telling me your not committed to your opinions that hold truth value? like the fact that you believe mohammed was a prophet, not a savage warrior that coquered most of the middle east to spread Islam, and had the christians not mounted the crusades probably would’ve conquered them as well.

that’s history. Historians GENERALLY agree on this, EXCEPT the Muslim historians who have something to gain from an alternative version of that history. Which history me looking from the outside should I believe? the one with nothing to gain or the one trying to present the best of Islam?

news for ya. the pan arab world IS muslim.

I’ve researched Islam and read ENOUGH of the Qu’ran to know it’s got no spiritual value and can be interpreted 9 ways to sunday like the bible to justify behavior that maybe once society found acceptable but today we know is unacceptable.

Does it upset you that I hold such an opinion? obviously. The fact is ANY reading or interpreting of the Qu’ran or any other holy book is ALL OPINION.

There is NO FACT involved with the interpretation of these books.

yes and I told you, that you should form YOUR OWN OPINION, it’d be like me telling you “well Dr. so and so at this university read the Qu’Ran and he’d have a good response to you about the Qu’ran” how does that further the conversation at all? it’s useless information.

When I being agnostic challenging the notion of god to believers and atheists I’m not looking for the traditional schools of though, I want to know WHAT YOU THINK. WHAT YOU FEEL.

You seem to have trouble conveying that and instead resort to “we need to know what the scholars think, we can feel nothing without resorting to the scholars.”

now why’d you go and make me naked:

goes and puts on leather pants and tight shirt.

I’m not fighting I’m prodding :stuck_out_tongue:

You still don’t get it though and resort to fighting me when I’m not trying to fight you I’m just trying to get you to think for yourself instead of spouting what you know. i thank thirst for pushing me in new directions, when will you thank him and others like him? (like me?) perhaps ocassionaly I poke too hard. With such a tempting white underbelly who can blame me?

so here’s my challenge.

Because Islam is mainly practiced in the middle east and the middle east is entrenched in so many crappy actions in the name of Islam does that mean:

  1. all followers of Islam believe the same?

  2. that I put all muslims in the same boat?

45

HELL(O) F(R)IEND(S)

The statement is logical… if god exists and has spoken to us through one prophet, then there is a chance that he has spoken to us through other prophets. It could be that all the prophets were valid up until Joseph Smith or that they are all invalid or that only some are valid. If we are to critique each prophet we must do so from knowledge, not simple conjecture you find in websites.

I forgot to mention that the Jehova’s Witnesses do not claim to have their own prophet. Theirs is an interpretation of the bible (even a bible rewritten in their favor). They do not have a new word. Thus, the Jehova’s Witnesses have as much claim to being the church of god as the Catholic church… (none). I will add this: at least most Jehova’s Witnesses that I know practice their religion–that’s more than I can say for most Catholics I know… or most Christians… or even most Muslims. Their religion is still false: just like the others I previously mentioned.

The Scientologists don’t even worship god–certainly not the Abrahamic god. More than anything, they believe that their souls are immortal and believe in some form of reincarnation…

Now the Mormons… to some degree they parallel Islam the most: they root themselves in an ancient religion, provide a ‘new revelation from god’ and it is a different direction than that of the former religion it was based on.

I believe in survival… this is not necessarily exclusive of other peoples. In fact, strength in numbers (society) is necessary to survival–thus, I am not exclusive: the more the merrier. I hope that clarifies my position for you.

Jesus said that all the law could be summarized with: (1) love god with all your strength, heart, mind (2) love your neighbor as yourself. Those are two pretty stringent laws to live up to… Essentially the other laws are there to stress the above two. There are no laws lacking in the teachings of Jesus: even without PAUL.

OK. Please do so. Show me how you have compared the DOCTRINE of each of these religions. Tell me all about it. I am all eyes (cause I can’t actually hear you).

I’m asking YOU Scythekain, how YOU have come to conclude for YOURself that YOUR interpretation is correct? Well, I’m sure a few Catholic priests and many Jehova’s Witnesses have interpreted the bible for themselves but I disagree with their interpretations because I have too. How can you agree with someone else’s interpretation if you have not read it yourself?

In fact, if you have not read it yourself, how can you claim that they are wrong? Tsk, tsk, tsk. How can you be taken serious if you make the statement that something is wrong without understanding the arguments for it? It’s like you screaming for Bush’s head without reading the Downing Street Memo… you wouldn’t do that would you? Is it safe to assume you have rarely read the bible?

[size=134]Seriously, admit you have not read much of the Qur’an![/size]

Finally, I don’t think anyone is hurt by poligamy… I don’t necessarily think it is a good idea either.

46

where the hell is this going? attack scythekain because he’s challenging Islam and lumping it with all other religions to be challenged?

I’m not saying my interpretation is correct. I’m saying there is no correct interpretation (for belief) on ANY holy book. The only way you can back up YOUR interpretation is through OPINION.

You can challenge Jehovah witnesses for rewriting the bible, for as I’ve shown such asinine rewriting isn’t necessary with WHAT we know from facts. But you can’t challenge them on their interpretation on parts that aren’t rewritten as that’s purely speculative isn’t it?

your interpretation of any book is based upon your experience. so when you base turn that on a book that you think is written by god, the results are disastrous!

let’s compare this to a work of fiction.

we both read Moby Dick and have different interpretations of the reading. Is either interpretation right (a literary professor will tell you his opinion is right but it’s not!) of course not both opinion about the book are NOT right and NOT wrong.

Do you see the problem now? I mean you can read it and say “wait a minute Captain Ahab never went to the moon!” and that’s why when challenged I pasted the whole verse or whole section in context to show that such an interpretation wasn’t completely an asinine one and is possible to glean from that section of text.

But you don’t care about that because I am poking your friends. That’s fine I feel fondly about them too, they are great people. I constantly challenge my fundie christian friends on their interpretation of the bible, BECAUSE I care about them and want to stimulate their brains.

as for me and the bible? I’ve read it several times, and in several different mindsets. once as a mormon, once as a christian once as an atheist and now as an agnostic.

the quran I’ve only read bits and pieces of and from that I can tell it’s not as well written as the bible but it’s certainly no different than the bible.

that doesn’t answer the question. if you believe christ was the last prophet he said there “will be many false prophets claiming to know the truth” (paraphrase my memory isn’t what it used to be).

and joseph smith himself said “many will try to slander me and say I’m not a true prophet”.

again, you can’t simply say “my prophet is greater than yours because god spoke to him” they all claim that. (well the christians claim that christ is god, so they win out there.)

there is no valid way even using god to pick and choose prophets.

I find this interesting as well, I started a thread about that back in october of last year and I admit I did at the time go way overboard on bashing both, because at the time I was christian.

47

and before you can get me on the downing street memo interpretation let me clarify that point.

moby dick = fiction. the type of interpretation has to do with emotion going through ahab’s mind and how it correlates to your life, and how you “saw” events in the book.

holy books = some fiction, some history. The type of interpretation is again based upon your experiences and upon your “doctrination”. There is no one right way to interprete it because it is not crystal clear.

DSM = minutes from a meeting. Crsytal clear interpretation. That doesn’t mean that people won’t still try to interprete it differently.

The important thing to remember is where it’s ok (as long as you don’t oppress someone else with your beliefs) to interprete some works differently, and it’s not ok to interprete others differently.

48

First, of your list, off the top of my head I can affirm that Afghanistan, Iran, and Turkey are not middle-eastern countries, nor are they Arab countries. As for what you consider the middle east, you will find that the former soviet states around Afghanistan are not middle eastern, nor Arab. Pakistan, India, Malaysia and all other Asian countries are not middle eastern, nor Arab. Indonesia (the largest Muslim country in the world in number of Muslims) is not middle eastern nor Arab. Central Africa is not the middle east and neither is north west Africa. The European Muslims are not in the middle east (Albania, Bosnia, Serbia, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia as called on your map) That leaves a hand full of tiny countries including Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, U.A.E., Yemen maybe.

Reconsider your evaluation. But I will make note that I do not have a figure I am 100% sure of. Nevertheless, in light of my account of the mid-east above, you will find it is closer to my projected 20% than your 60%.

I am in absolute agreement. But this does not pose a problem for Islam in any way with regard to the interpretations noetician clarified for example. E=mc2 might be interpreted by one as Eric=Manny’s crotch squared. This has no affect on the truth value of e=mc2. Conceding that empirical truths are different from a priori truths, or ontological truths, my point is, because something is misinterpreted does not have any consequences on what the author meant for his proposition to mean. It means what the author intended it to mean. If I read the cat in the hat to a group of people we’d get different interpretations, so what? That’s the beauty of knowledge, you must come to it deliberately, sometimes with a struggle. If people falsely interpret Islam, that is a problem that is inevitable since we are dealing with humans. Those who justify killing, etc. with Islam are in an extreme minority. There are many Muslims, over 1 billion. If half of one percent were violent extremists, you can imagine that is a lot of people. But I would not think that if we did away with religion, crimes of these sorts would somehow disappear. That would be foolish.

When did I ever say I was an atheist?

AVICENNA A.D.:

Scythecain:

Sure I am. But you missed the key word in my sentence. “You are inappropriately committed to your opinions on matters that hold truth value,” making reference to your failure of grasping the true Islamic principles and making elementary interpretations on Qur’anic ayah’s.

The Crusades began in 1095. Mohammad died in 632. The crusades took place long after his death. And your description of the crusades implicitly as a good thing disgusts me. Streets ran red with the blood of innocents. You wish to talk about savages? You have balls for bringing attention to Christian practices when talking about acts of savagery. I do not need to get into what sorts of things Christians have done in the name of their religion. But I am not a dullard who would attribute that to Jesus or the Bible.

Mohammad was NOT a savage warrior. Like I said, I encourage and in depth study of his life, teachings, accomplishments.

AVICENNA A.D.

Scythecain:

No way! You hear that everyone? We’ve landed on the moon!!

No spiritual value? There is no use with you. You demonstrate over and over in remarks like these that you have HARDLY studied Islam. My bet is you have not studied it at all. No spiritual value? You have made it glaringly clear that you do not own a Qur’an and have never picked one up and read one. I could find spiritual value in walking my dog. You can’t find any spiritual value in the Qur’an? You either have not read it or your soul must be of stone. I endorse the former. Even if one does not believe in the Qur’an, it is a beautifully delivered prose that moves anyone who reads it.

No one’s fighting you Scythe.

49

HELL(O) F(R)IEND(S)

Don’t feel attacked. No one is attacking you for anything. If you have not read the entire Qur’an, then using your example about Moby Dick (terrible book by the way) is not sound. A person who has not read the book in full cannot accurately depict the book.

This has nothing to do with siding with friends or siding with republicans or democrats or any side. It has to do with truth.

So you see… how can you claim to make a valid interpretation of Islamic doctrine if you have read very little of the book? The point I was trying to make is that perhaps you should study the book (you won’t become Muslim if that is your fear) and then can make appropriate comments about the Qur’an.

Agreed. You will have to decide for yourself by reviewing all available texts.

[size=134]Here is a challenge: To Muslims: read the Bible. To Jews: read the New Testament + the Qur’an. To Christians: read the Qur’an + the WHOLE Bible.[/size]

Why? Because believers in the Abrahamic god should investigate if their religion is surely the correct one. If your religion is the ‘right’ religion, then there is no harm and or NOTHING to worry about. If you do not, you are blinding yourself to the possibilities.

To Atheist or Agnostics: Read every religious book to strengthen your conviction that there is no god, or that god almost certainly does not exist and that all religions are flawed.

I take this challenge. I’ll start with the Qur’an… what are the best English translations?

50

AMEN

theres no reason for someone not to “explore” other religions, they should have nothing to fear f they are truely positive that their religion is the “right one”

51

This is a piece of well intentioned naivete. What is needed is for the reader to bracket his own predispositions rather than using them as a measure to judge the validity or ‘worthiness’ of every new text. Unfortunately your predispositions are not merely a set of conscious attitudes or a list of propositional arguments; they are the atmosphere of your thought itself. There is no mediatory position between two sets of beliefs from which to evaluate which is ‘correct’; what occurs most of the time is that we will believe ourselves to be capable of such ‘objectivity’ and yet in truth we will only have introduced a third position between the two we are putatively evaluating, which itself passes without reflection. We do not step outside of one belief - rather we step into another belief.

The question then becomes; what facilitates this transition? Can it be otherwise than arbitrary? Even applying a standard of rationality (which also means non-rationality) to this decisional process is already a commitment in the dark.

But otherwise - sure, go for it… :slight_smile: I recommend the King Fahd Saudi version of the English Koran.

There is more to the problem than my meagre attempt to articulate it, btw. But I believe your heart is in the right place.

Regards,

James

52

I DO NOT recommend the Shaikh ibn-Taymiyyah tradition. I recommend the Yusef Ali translation. Saudi Arabia and the wahabism in Saudi Arabia is a big part of our problems. I have read the King Fahd version, it is in stark contrast to what most Muslims read and is poorly narrated.

53

HELL(O) F(R)IEND(S)

Perhaps… I shall need to reflect on this some more. However, I continuously read the bible and don’t find myself moving from my agnostic leanings to Christian leanings…

You give me too much credit. My hope is that everyone reads every religion and is convinced god is merely a creation of man. But thanks for the kindness… I shall have to read multiple versions of the Qur’an (much like there are multiple versions I have read of the bible.

Thanks for the suggestions. :slight_smile:

54

Well you’re the expert on this topic, I freely admit. Didn’t I hear you saying that the Koran had not been significantly revised (in contrast to the Bible)? My copy of the Koran has the original Arabic besides the translation - how liberal can the translation be? (I ask, naively perhaps). Unless of course they are tampering with the original text, in which case this becomes questionable;

(if in fact you had made this claim)

And if this is not the case, and the core text is the same, then surely anyone who speaks Arabic would feasibly be able to check the translations themselves? At least any glaring distortions or manipulations would be recognised?

You are fond of distinguishing between Islam and the particularisms of culture and religious expression. I will not offer an opinion on the validity of this; however I will ask whether the argument is compromised if each culture has not only its own interpretation and manifestation of the Koran, but its own Koran itself. This hints at the more insidious problem of interpretation; perhaps something whose complexity cannot be captured in such a brief post as this (which is why I steer clear of it). If you treat ‘Islam’ as an ideal then it becomes legitimate to ask of when and indeed if it has ever been done justice (i.e. ‘realised’) in any real context - and if not then with what warrant you feel qualified to talk about what Islam ‘really is’ at all. This means; where does the ‘correct’ and ‘original’ message come from, if it has never been historically realised? If I must offer an opinion here, I maintain that whilst there is some merit to distinguishing between a religion/belief and its adherence; to attempt to keep them wholly apart for the sake of argument is ultimately spurious.

Of course we may simply say that, in fact, it has been realised at one time or another, and so we need only re-familiarise ourselves with the understanding of Islam enjoyed in those times, in order to know and appreciate what the actual message of this religion is. Now what I do not understand is how you are able to claim that any modern translation of the Koran can be ‘more correct’ than any other, unless you have some reference point of ‘original meaning’ to point to and use as your measure for distinguishing between good and bad translations.

My apologies; it seems I have done what I promised I would try to avoid… What I seek, I suppose, is clarification of your position in this regard.

Simply looking at the words on the page does not constitute ‘reading’ nor ‘understanding’ nor ‘open-mindedness’. You are not a passive tabula rasa who could justifiably make an argument of the type ‘the revelation did not jump up off the page and seize me, therefore there is no revelation or revealed’. All of your previous feelings of revelation or insight when reading a text are due not to some immanent ‘truth bell’ which tolls every time you read something which is ‘correct’; it is merely the rather more mundane presence of your own ‘entry point’ into the text; it is intertextuality in motion; and there is ultimately nothing in it which is either necessarily indicative of truth or necessarily indicate of falsity.

Regards

James

55

I disagree with this, because while the interpretative ability is similiar you don’t need to read all of the bible, quran or book of mormon to get an idea of what the religion is about.

jewish:
temple sacrifices to atone for sin (blood atonement)
strict adherence to biblical law

christian:
christ is the blood atonement for sin
the new law is “written on their hearts and not on tablets”

Islam:
(care to fill in the blanks avicenna? what is the doctrine on sin and law?)

even though I do disagree I’ll check out the quran and read more of it, I’m not afraid of it transforming me into a muslim. I just don’t see a purpose in it, as I don’t think it’s going to change my mind on how well it’s written.

(which it’s certainly written better than the book of mormon which is a complete hack work.)

56

Right, not in its original Arabic. It is in the translations that various schools exploited the liberty of translating whether intentional or not. Noetician might have more to say about this.

57

Right…the arabic text is unaltered and all translations are for the most part the same, with no glaring distortions or manipulations. However, there are some parenthetical explanations and footnotes in the Saudi King Fahd version that have a Wahhabi bent. I agree with AD in that the King Fahd saudi version would not be the best bet. Yusef Ali’s translation is probably the most popular and is pretty well-translated.

I understand where you are coming from, and it’s a very good point. However, I think we need to distinguish between the realization of “real” Islam in the form of a government, and in a general form (as a way of life for Muslims as a whole). The fact that governments act wrongfully, sometimes under the guise of Islam, is no reflection of any destruction of actual or true Islam. Muslims, in their daily lives realize and practice actual Islam, as it has been practiced from its inception. Muslims generally understand Islam’s “correct” and “real” message (and it is generally the same message amongst all sects, with the exception of little fringe groups that were established long after Islam, such as Wahhabism). We are not distinguishing between Islam and its general adherence, as if it is some ideal that has not been realized. We are speaking about the Islam that is both practiced and taught worldwide, as opposed to “Islamic” customs that are promulgated by corrupt governments such as Saudi Arabia, or individuals such as bin Laden. Islam itself has not been lost. Rather, Islam is a set of rules, customs, practices and habits that make up an entire way of life (from the way Muslims behave, to the way they associate with others, to the way they do business, to the way they spend their money, to the way they to the way they eat, dress, or even walk and talk). I was raised as a Muslim, and I was raised with an understanding of religion by being taught the Qur’an, the traditions of the Prophet, etc. as well as the ethics specific to Islam. All of my Muslim friends possess this understanding. The practicing ones practice Islam much in the same way I do, and the non-practicing ones still understand Islam much in the same way I do. The same goes for Muslims all around the world, even if they live in a country that has an “Islamic” government. Hardly anyone believes the government is actually Islamic.

I completely disagree (surprise, surprise lol). I don’t think an entire religion can be summarized on the basis of its doctrine on sin and law. While you may not have to read the entire Bible, Qur’an, or Book of Mormon to see what a religion is “all about” (although I think it is very important), you certainly do have to do a lot of reading on the religion.
I don’t think categories for atonement and law quite do the trick. Muslims don’t have such a notion of atonement for sin; rather, they ask God for forgiveness with a sincere heart and believe that God is merciful and forgiving. Practicing Muslims take their actions quite seriously because they know that they are completely responsible for their sins, and in asking God for forgiveness, they are in a way vowing not to repeat the action. As for law, it is derived from the Qur’an as well as the traditions of Prophet Mohammad, which have been narrated in pretty good detail (however, not all of the recorded ones are authentic. Many were fabricated after his death, and scholars often sift through the narrations and the narrative chain to determine which ones are likely authentic and which ones are likely fabricated). But how much does this tell you about Islam? Far more important than atonement for sin is the most important pillar of Islam: its strict monotheism. One cannot know a religion by simply knowing where the law is derived from. Actual knowledge or understanding of the law, foundations, and core beliefs is necessary.

I don’t see the relevance of how the Qur’an is written to gaining an understanding of the Qur’an and Islam. Even if it were poorly written, you would still gain a better understanding of the religion by reading it. However, since I am on the topic…the Qur’anic prose is completely unmatched in the Arabic world. Anyone who understands Arabic and has read any of the Qur’an will tell you that, Muslim or non-Muslim. The Arabs during the time of Mohammad, known for their poetry and literature, were challenged to create a verse similar to those of the Qur’an and were unable to. When Islam was introduced, many people converted simply by hearing the Qur’an being read. Unfortunately, the English translations do not do it much justice. They cannot capture the poetic, graceful, and profound qualities of the Arabic text. Nonetheless, they are good translations, and they get the message across…and to me, they still convey the beauty of the book. For example, a verse I recently read that made me stop and think: “It is He Who created the Night and the Day, and the sun and the moon: all swim along, each in its rounded course” 21:33. Regardless of the language, the description of celestial bodies as “swimming” in their orbit is, to me at least, beautiful.

Peace out.

PS–I’m totally just editing this in so that I am not misunderstood. Sythekain: I am not trying to make you think the Qur’an is beautiful. Obviously you are entitled to your opinion and I have no problem with that. I was simply stating and explaining my own opinion.

58

i’m not going to ask you why because you have already said.

but why, in Catholicism is it okay for a woman to be canonised and made a saint, but not for her to be a minister?

is it because after she is dead, giving a woman ‘power’ will prove no threat to our patriarchal society?

wow. that is the most feminist thought i have ever had. i am rather surprised.

seriously though; it’s ok to have a woman saint, but not a woman priest? what’s all that about??

(and sorry if this has already been brought up. i didn’t have time to read te whole thread cos it’s 3 pages at the moment and i have to leave for work soon… make coffee, get dressed, psych myself up in the mirror…)

59

well of course not I was generalizing.

After reading some Thomas Paine last night it set straight the point I was trying to get across.

If I came to you with a book that I told you god gave me and that I spoke to angels, would you be inclined to believe me?

If I wrote a book about a great man, then my book was copied and expanded upon and resurrection added, should our first inclination be to believe me? (the original author, or the author who copied my work.)

We must apply these same rules to all religions, because he claimed divine intervention, in no way means he is excluded from logic. All modern religions are handed down hearsay. “psst, this moses guy says he saw god and that god gave him two tablets of rules.”

IMO, these people from these older times were far more gullible, if a similiar event happened today no one would believe him. Want proof? look at this guy in Vegas who calls himself “Prophet Yahweh”, who says he can call aliens down. (I think it was just a random blit, if he really called down a ufo why didn’t it come closer?)

rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2 … ivers.html

(make sure to watch the video so you can see what I’m talking about.)

using the rules of hearsay established by prophets of yore we should believe anyone who comes out of the woodwork proclaiming divine contact.

60

sythe…you can’t be serious. the fact that there is a guy in vegas who claims to be “prophet yahweh” is no “proof” that anyone else was a false prophet. you can’t seriously be alleging that thousands of people accepted Mohammad as a prophet merely because they were more “gullible” back then. what kind of statement is that anyway? people are people, and many of those people were brilliant in literature, art, philosophy, science, math, etc. why would they be any less critical of religion? your argument makes no sense.