Okay, found my critique regarding your hero. I will check the source you specified.
AVICENNA A.D. Hum, your name is that of an Arabic philosopher and physycian. A.D. anno domini, in the year of our lord. Interesting insight. 
Is this what you are discussing? I checked my philosophy, history, religious studies, and English rhetoric text for Anslem, he is not mentioned. Hence, the web.
praiseofglory.com/anselm.htm
Hi thirst4metal,
I was perusing an academic library to analyze my conclusions regarding Islam. That is, I reviewed both the Islamic theology and the Western academics critique of Islam. You might find this interesting. 
It is an Atlantic Monthly article, but was in an academic library. Librarians are sticky regarding incorporating texts into the academic setting, so this is considered a valid source.
AVICENNA A.D,
Your genius hero does not appear to merit much interest in academic circles. I am batting close to zilch on this guy.
Aspacia, refer to Fall of the Angel, specifically, St. Anselmâs notions on a dual oriented being. But we should be respectful to the author of this thread and discuss this somewhere else. Let me know if you start a new thread. I posted some notes on this you can read: ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/vi ⌠?p=1650189
We should delete our posts that have deviated from the subject to keep this thread alive and let visitors have a chance to talk about something.
Before my reponses to the foulest, most prejudiced thinker on ILP, a comment to Aspacia: The author of this thread genuinely wished to pursue a scholarly talk about a specific topic he raised. If you want to rant (as a perfect characterization of what you deem your philosophical debate), do it elsewhere, this thread is too valuable to be ruined by anyone, much less you and I. You seem to be unable to focus on one topic and speak coherently about it. Every thread Iâve seen you in, you single handedly cause it to spiral into what you want to talk about, which is many loosely related topics that are always the same. Start your own thread. A matter of respect, not a matter of liberty.
Aspacia wrote:
What are you talking about?
Aspacia wrote:
What are you talking about? Revelations from Angel Gabriel.
Which scholars?
The Shura my dear. The council recorded it as each revelation came. What is now the one book, the Qurâan, was not recorded at once, it was revealed verse by verse over his lifetime beginning at around age 40 I believe. Look it up. Not online though, the internet seems to be your sole source of knowledge as you only cite the internet, only request internet citations, and only speak of what youâve learned from the internet. Go to your nearest University and you will find the historical record, to this effect, disappointing to your claim. So on what grounds, I ask, would you make this assertion?
And does it not dazzle you, the poetic prose of Arabic that is the Qurâan, that he related, word for word? Think about this for a minute.
Not quite Aspacia. I implore you to prove that the Bible has NOT been re-edited a number of times, you will find yourself in disappointment to know that your Prophet Mohammad was correct. You only embarass yourself Aspacia, and are counterproductive to your objective of being a critic of Islam, for you show that the rebuttals to Islam (as a sole surrogate opponent of Islam thus far on this thread) are weak, monolithic, childish in your disrespectful tone, and personally asserted. My point is, not even a skeptic of Islam would go for these comments you make because the subject aside, your comments are so over simplistic, monolithic in thought and unrealistic to the mind of a critic of any school. Your demeanor alone accomplishes this.
Mohammad did something unprecedented: he unified all of Arabia. This is a subjective issue, but look at the history of the peninsula of pre-Islamic Arabia in their constant warfare, treatment of women as worse than cattle, murderous drunken interactions, and so forth. The Muslims were sought to be exterminated, the Muslims defended themselves after retreat more than once and asylum provided by a Christian King in Abyssinia.
No, they would not. Muslim means to submit to God. I feel confident in saying Moses and Jesus submitted to God. To say that Moses and Jesus are not Muslim, is to say that they did not submit to God, and one who does not submit to God stands in defiance to God. This is the sense in which Moses and Jesus would be called Muslim by Muslims.
Islam has not evolved yet? You mean the words in the books? They are constant Iâm afraid. What you mean is Muslims have not evolved yet. And I am perturbed that you feel you can make such a statement about 1.5+ billion people, 18% of whom are Arab, which is who I assume you have in mind when saying they have not evolved. What hideous thought processes you have, your transmission of words is an ugly and miserable discharge of disorganized, monolithic, inaccurate utterances, and your mind, the dark eerie factory where light has no subsistence. Look what you made me do, your thinking is so disturbing I had to get poetic on your ass. How could you speak in the manner you do, characterizing a people into categories of some sub-genus. You are brass as Plato would identify you. Shame on you.
Sensitive, touchy, touchy arenât you 
It is an open board, if the kitchen is too hot, get out. I will speak my mind regardless of what you personally think of me. Resorting to ad hominem attacks digresses from the issue oh, wise philosopher. As a philosopher you should know this. I never claimed to be a philosopher nor a theologian. I have taken philosophy and religious studies classes, but my disciplines are history and English. Now, who is the bonehead?
Aspacia wrote:
What are you talking about?
[/quote]
I was discussing thirst for metals following quote.
Aspacia wrote:
Remember, not only the Angel Gabriel, but Satan as well. Both spoke to Mohammed. It is through Mohammed that there is Islam.
This is only opinion, but Moses revealed the word of God as well. How long was he on that mountain? How many days? Wasnât this enough time to create the Ten Commandments? Most of these commandments are basically good rules for society to live by.
I simply believe that Mohammed lived near Jews and Christians and heard them speak of their religion. Again, much in these monotheistic faiths are great rules for a society to thrive.
The Arab Pennisula was war torn. Hence, Mohammed incorporated much of these two faiths and created a new religion to establish a type of order to his world. I believe he muddled the Torah and New Testament, that is remembered the stories out of order. Hence, why the Quâran is not chronological. Did you know that at first Muslims prayed toward Jerusalem until the Jews ridiculed Mohammed. He then changed the prayers toward Mecca.
Which scholars?
It was not written during Mohammedâs lifetime. Here is a valid edu. source.
wsu.edu:8080/~dee/ISLAM/QURAN.HTM
Well, Honey, I use valid academic sites, not the mumbo jumbo that is out there. Academic librarians will tell you that books are quickly becoming defunct as microfisch are. Just use valid edu sites. Or if you want to understand a certain faith or organization go to a .org site that is sponsored by that faith or organization. Discretion is necessary. The site I use was provided by an Islamic organization and is USC and provides three translations of each book and volume.
This came from an academic library and the article is written by scholars.
wsfi.net/Documents/WHAT%20IS ⌠LESTER.HTM
No, not much in poetry dazzles me. Humanity overcoming much disease, creating technology, the wonderful home I live in, the bird currently chirping outside my window, the wonderful mountain range surround the valley I live in, these dazzle me, not poetry. Emily Dickenson sucks, and many English instructors agree. I am a prose person.
Yes, The King James Version has omitted several chapters. The Dead Sea Scrolls appear to validate much of the Bible. Do I view this as Godâs word. NO. I thought I made this clear, I am a Deist who believes that if there is a God, God is LOL regarding humanityâs stupidity regarding faith and the violence faith has caused.
Actually, much of my conclusions stem from Muslim scholars who are skeptics. Do I accept all the scholars conclusions? No, but I think and reflect regarding the validity of their claims.
My, My. Again the ad hominem attacks. Who is the childish one.
Yes he did. I just believe he was trying to bring some order to his world, and used the Torah and New Testament to help him in doing so. Many of his rules are as ridiculous as Christian pagan rituals. Frankly, I find communion a bit cannibalistic. Some rules are practical. Arabia is a desert. Alcohol is forbidden to Muslims. Alcohol dehydrates. A very practical rule.
Jews and Christians will disagree. Actually, Moses and Jesus are probably scrowling at you and Muslims for making this claim. THEY WERE JEWS OF JEWISH DESCENT.
Hum, the point is that Shia, Sunni, etc., have been at each others throats for a long time similar to how the Protestants and Catholics were at each others throats until they evolved into secularism that respects all faiths.
Most of the Middle-East is not secular, is Islamic, and very intolerant of other faiths. Hell, the Saudis regularly shred Bibles in their airports. Remember, member of other faiths if they survive are given second class citizenship.
I take it you are Muslim and deeply religious, else you would have not reacted as you did to my posts.
LOL, typical, myopic behavior from many religious individuals.
I am so dazzled to live in a country where individuals can disagree without being tortured, jailed, massacred for divergent beliefs. Get my drift oh intolerant one
HELL(O) F(R)IEND(S)
Aspacia, your reasoning sometimes baffles me⌠do you realize that you are NOT in the Rant Forum. If you want to provide information that is âtoo hotâ please do so in the Rant Forum. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
I cannot believe you are reacting so childishly. It saddens me that you are compelled to behave with such immaturity and bludgeon this thread with your poor and inappropriate posts.
Câest la vieâŚ
My post was direct to AVICENNA A.D. and his ad hominem attack against me. Please read his red colored comment. He had it coming.
Please remember, though not a theologian, I am a valid researcher. Many historians, and religious scholars often have divergent view, and often have divergent conclusions.
thirst4metal, I almost forgot, this is the Religion forum and I was addressing religion. If you do not agree with my conclusions, fine, we can all agree to disagree, it is still a free country.
Bonehead? For appropriately calling your posts for what they are? You have a disrespectful tone and speak of religions that many people hold holy as if it is some false doctrine by a power hungry male who is sex crazed and wants to accumulate wealth. Even if this is the case, have some respect is the standard you should adhere to. Some class please (in both senses of the word). More importantly, however, are YOUR conclusions and/or inferences, are largely unsupported, e.g. Mohammad lived around Christians and Jews so he just compiled the Torah and Bible, do you know how over simplistic your conclusions are (try spending your lifetime to come to this conclusion and then Iâll listen to what you have to say) and at the same time was illiterate and at the same time he was able to relate Arabic prose similar to Shakespearian prose with high grammar, and at the same time he wanted to unify the peninsula for peace and at the same time wanted only to gain power and have womenâŚ
Aspacia wrote:
Quote:
Avicenna wrote:
Holy Mary does it take patience to correspond with you. So much time has to go into getting you to understand a simple point let alone get a coherent response from you. What I am asking for, is for you to explain how the Qurâan âjumbs aroundâ in its logic.
Aspacia wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
Aspacia:
Are you attempting to say here that Mohammad had some pact with Satan as well and the revelations in the Qurâan come from Satan as well?
You speak in such obscurity it is no surprise that you have had no philosophical training. I donât even think YOU know what youâre trying to say. I vote that you be confined to the Rant House because you turn threads into what we have here, as I said before, your loosely related, various issues that YOU want to talk about that are transmitted in gross obscurities, and are generally unscholarly utterances of a nearly useless sort, having to do little with the authors topic(s)
What in Godâs name does this have to do with anything?? But since you bring it up, one of the holiest sites to Muslims is in Jerusalem, and now you will make the claim that Mohammad changed the site to Mecca because the Jews had enough clout to force him to do so? I thought you just said he took over the entire area and became the head honcho. In any case, the Kaâba, the place where the first prayers to a One God took place was restored, idols thrown out, and it became the new direction of prayer. I bet you will say now that this is idol worship. No, there is nothing worship worthy of the kaâba, just establishes uniformity in prayer.
You still have not answered: which scholars? You cannot make a charge and not support it, this is a philosophy forum, not an âAspacia way of debatingâ forum.
You begin from a cynical premise. You decide to not look for any possible wisdom in Islam. Look at the vices and crimes associated with alcohol. Could it be that this might have played a factor? It does, a primary one, and the law is spoken of in this light, that alcohol negatively alters ones judgment.
Aspacia:
Quote:
No, they would not. Muslim means to submit to God. I feel confident in saying Moses and Jesus submitted to God. To say that Moses and Jesus are not Muslim, is to say that they did not submit to God, and one who does not submit to God stands in defiance to God. This is the sense in which Moses and Jesus would be called Muslim by Muslims.
Aspacia:
It just means to submit to GodâŚArabs are stuck in their language. That is the word describing that, they call all Prophets submitters to God. Hermeneutics, semantics, philosophy of languageâŚcheck it out, itâll be good for you.
Aspacia:
Secularism need not necessarily have a monopoly over respecting other faiths. Look at Al-Andalus where Muslims were the rulers of a place of true religious freedom. Anyhow, case in point to your post above, you have a tunnel view of Islam supported by lack of knowledge which I encourage you to escape. The Mid East composes about only 18% of the Muslim world, do the mathâŚtry not to speak about Islam and âMuslimsâ when you are only speaking for a specific demographic in a specific layer of society with a specific ideology in specific lands that are a minority to most Muslims. Besides, no one has the authority to begin any sentence with âMuslimsâŚâ or âChristiansâŚâ, etc. when the sentence ends up with a charge like yours. Muslims are intolerantâŚetc.
If you really want to know, I am anything but religious, I am a typical American college student who âdoes it all,â hardly in compliance to and laws pertaining to Islam, Christianity, or Judaism. Except for the major ones which you follow as well I presume, e.g. no murder, no idol worship, no banging your neighbors wifeâŚwell, maybe the first 2
PatheticâŚin the end, you want to pigeon hole me. I defend these countries is what you allude to. You should be embarrased of yourself, slap yourself and go buy Inroduction to Logic by Montague and Kalish. You really need to stop sizing people up, much less me, if you knew me, you would be totally confused as to why I defend Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Probably because I fully donât know. What I do know is that there are morals and respect that does not come with the secularists who find little holy and sacred in our world and treat people as merely a means in many cases. But even Satan would be tempted to defend religion to your form of debate.
HELL(O) F(R)IEND(S)
There is finally something worth reading in regards to AspaciaâŚ
That was the funniest thing Iâve read all week. Yes, I am aware it has little to do with Aspacia.
However, what is NOT funny is aspacia basically inferring that AVICENNA is an intolerant torturer and jailor. Amazingly ignorant and pathetic!
Now, who is the one stereotyping?
Our favorite spot and activity is in our scenic mountains, with a picnic lunch, wine, bread, cheese and fruit and good books to read and discuss. I find enjoying Godâs gifts and respecting these gifts probably more coincide with Godâs original intent.
Satan, God are LOL regarding humanityâs stupidity killing each other, Godâs alleged creations in the name of faith. 
Critiquing all issues, does name make a person immoral. You should read some of the scathing feminist tracts regarding religion.
It sounds like you are use to winning arguments by insulting others and ad hominem attacks. This will not work with me.
Now be a good little college student and go back to the classroom where the instructors have to politely smile, and let the grownups talk.
I did not infer he was, I am claiming that many Islamic countries do this.
Enough is enough. Conversing with you seems to serve little intellectual importance. My last response to you, this has become a personal thread between you and I. Before going further, I will admit I am condascending, I try not to be, but I just canât help it. For that, I regret. But I think you over exaggerated some of my words and misinterpreted certain things.
Iâm not asking you to respect me, I could care less for your respect, I only ask that you not speak about religions in such an ill-spirited way. It is not a command, just a request for respect. But youâve declinedâŚ
The analogy was made for the audience of this forum, who I presume art not Arabic speakers, hence the allusion to Shakespeare to help thee get a feeling of what thine know not (about the complexity of the language of the Qurâan. It was just to make clear that the Qurâan is not written in âlaymans terms.â And, yes, I have gone to Arabic school since 8 years old and have taken Arabic at UCLA.
But I donât think this neccessitates a declaration that the content is illogical. Wouldnât you agree. More, the Qurâan was revealed over a number of years, pertaining to what was going on then sometimes. But how is it not chronological, you mean itâs out of order as the revelations came?
I would not recommend Rushdie, and the fatwah was more a statement than anything else 
There is no conflict there. One can over simplify a phenomenon and state it in an obscure manner. I donât see the conflict.
I understood your implication just fine, I just disagree with it as the sole or even primary reason. Room for debate I think, it was a complex situation. Besides, I never claimed to be a scholar. I am not a scholar.
Now youâre talkinâ
No, I donât. How about the vices and crimes associated with being human? And that billions belong to a major religion, but are still human. 1) Humans often engage in vice and crime as seen in history. 2) Many humans belong to a major religion which is based on faith. 3) These members are still human. 4) Some humans who have faith commit crimes. This is the way I look at it. While it sounds like you see religion e.g. Islam as the cause, I see it as the effect.
Nope. Nothing that negatively alters your judgment. The last significant drug advocacy by Muslims in a Muslim court with clerics, etc (to my knowledge) were the Sufiâs in Yemen trying to legalize hash. It failed. But Muslims do use drugs. It is forbidden however.
I have an idea about what goes on in Saudi Arabia, a couple of my closest friends are from there and live there back and forth to the U.S. Are you expecting me to defend them? I wonât. I think the Saudi govât sucks and they are hedonists who let Wahabbism thrive to retain power. They will at all costs avoid a revolution to keep up âtheir ways.â
The comment was about me, not you. But I donât think that because I am pursuing a Doctorate and you teach college that you can claim intellectual superiority, I certainly would not.
Of course, heâs smarter than meâŚheâs your son. Heâs smarter than everyone, better looking, better mannered, heâs the best boy in the whooole world. Maternal goggles.
And the truth is revealedâŚZionist ay? Israel belongs to Semites because God said so. Oh, maybe youâre a political zionist, Herzl subsciber. Logic ends here. But I will say that if the land belongs to Semites, Arabs are full Semites, thus the land is equally theirsâŚright? Just a thought.
Iâm referring to certain movements, hence my use of âin many cases,â not all cases.
What you characterize as my ad hominem attacks were but a sentence or two next to my words âon the issues.â
So where do you teach logic? Sorry to say this, but I think youâre lying.
HELL(O) F(R)IEND(S)
Aspacia⌠since you have failed to respect the point of this thread I will just join in and point out a few things. Now, IF you can follow guidelines, we can have a VERY GOOD discussion about Islam. Below are some of your previous posts that were unmerited, inappropriate, or vague. I am requesting THOROUGH and CONSICE posts when you REPLY. Also, to evaluate if you can truly follow the simplest of guidelines I will make requests below that I hope you will follow to make this an easier discussion.
Topic 1. So what? Godâs laws supercede manâs laws in the Christian bible. If the law of the land, which Christians are supposed to obey, forbids something that god specifically commands the bible is clear you must follow godâs law. Also, for a people so dedicated to god why are YOU trying to subject them to your belief that a secular government must exist. In fact, it could be argued that since god is perfect (at least to the believers) and god has provided laws then those laws are far more better equipped to rule man. The same theory could be applied to Christianity. I am not arguing that this is right, only that you are arguing that you have a problem with a system that most Muslims may NOT have a problem with⌠If it works for them what business is it of yours? Do not QUOTE me⌠refer to this as TOPIC 1 if you respond.
Topic 2. The same applies to all religions. You must submit to the will of god. The act of submission, however, is an act of FREE WILL. So, why do you bring this up? The discussion was free will in general not submission to the text. Do you deny that free will is a doctrine within the Quran? Do not quote me⌠refer to this as Topic 2 if you respond.
Topic 3. AVICENNAâs point was that you should have some respect by not changing the subject of the thread⌠clearly you could not grasp that it was not an order but a request to stick to the point. In my opinion this is an attitude problem. This is not the Rant House or Mundane Babble⌠I think we have more freedom in those rooms; however, here we should have much more respect for each other. Do you understand? Now, you could continue to show your disrespect and no one will stop you⌠however, I am asking nicely because I value other peoples opinions and want to follow their reasoning. However, rudeness is a barrier to common understanding. Do not quote me⌠refer to this as TOPIC 3.
Topic 4. Please do⌠start a thread in the forum that you believe will best allow you to express yourself (Rant?).
So your point is that you are no expert⌠but are qualified anyways?
Honestly, I suspect any reason behind this would be fallacious. However, I am beginning to think that many of your thoughts were found on the internet and you just managed to reword them with much less logic⌠But, please tell me how YOU compare communion to cannibalism. Also, do you find it a bit vampiric? Was Jesus the first vampire in your opinion?
How is this not inferring that Avicenna is intolerant, would torture you, jail you, and massacre you for your beliefs? How can you not consider this wrong? Your logic fails to make sense⌠I request you RETRACT this accusation.
I donât find you credible despite your claims. Your credentials would be easier to accept if you did not completely miss the point of this thread. I cannot emphasize how much I doubt you are a teacher⌠if you are a teacher I am beginning to understand why American children have trouble learningâŚ
You had it coming. I did not start the insults, you did.
Good, because I do not respect those who react to criticism with ad hominem attacks, you silly child.
You did not ask, you said âshould.â Get real. This is a red flag for many individuals. If you knew how to argue, and had a proper instructor, he or she would tell you not to speak in âabsolutesâ and avoid words like âshould,â âmust,â âeveryone,â etc. Hedge your bets and use words like âperhaps,â âmight consider,â âmaybe,â etc. Any teacher worth his or her salt knows this and instructs regarding this.
Oh, please! Most Muslims do not speak Arabic either and rely on the various translations. If I follow your âlogicâ then they do not understand the Quâran either.
It was a false analogy, any first year philosophy student knows this. Also, the web site I use is the USC web site which has three translations for each volume.
Let me again clarify, it is not in chronological order, and I find it illogical. How much clearer can I be. Again, in my opinion, and the opinion of other theologians from Judaism, Chrisitanity, which I am not, and Islamic scholars, Muhammed heard the Jews and Christians discuss their religion, and when creating his own religion to bring order to his world, he recited what he remembered out of chronological order, forgot chucks, and filled in the blanks with the moon, cranes, etc. I mean really, the Kaâaba is a meteorite, and was a pagan symbol. Again, I know that Christianity if filled with pagan symbols as well. The Jews ridiculed Mohammed for not correctly reciting thier Torah.
Okay, let me definine chronological: In timely sequence. First, second, third. The Quâran begins with prayers, faith, etc. Then is goes to Adam and Eve, Eventually, it discusses the creation. In contrast, the Torah and New Testament begin with the creation. There is more. Carefully reread the Quâran for comprehension, not just the words, but what the words imply. This is my gig.
Talk about euphemism, the fatwa was a death sentence and Rushdie is still hiding.
You would not.
Obviously. Also, yes, many theologians disagree as they often do. This is my conclusion after reading many scholarly critiques, both positive and negative regarding Islam. Remember, I read critiques regarding many issues, not just religion. I am simply stating that I concluded that all religions have violent, misogynistic traits.
I was being sarcastic
I do not believe it, I agree. Humanity is rife with violence, greed, xenophobia. Many of the worse humans I have ever met, or read about, like Pat Buchanan, Jerry Falwell, use religion for personal gain, prestige, power, etc. Actually, the problem is that many use faith to justify their crimes (i.e. Crusades, recent beheadings)
No, drugs are regularly used in Middle-Eastern hospitals. They are allowed, booze is not. Also, some of these countries have hashis parlors and the authorities, if not legal, turn a blind eye. Think the hookah pipe.
I have an idea about what goes on in Saudi Arabia, a couple of my closest friends are from there and live there back and forth to the U.S. Are you expecting me to defend them? I wonât. I think the Saudi govât sucks and they are hedonists who let Wahabbism thrive to retain power. They will at all costs avoid a revolution to keep up âtheir ways.â
[/quote]
Recently, they have been cracking down. The following Saudi site is government controlled, but has a very different tone than in previous years:
arabnews.com/
No, perhaps not, I have probably read quite a bit more than you. Also, you voice indicates you are early on in your studies. You might consider reading Stephen Gouldâs The Mismeasure of Man, as it discusses how intelligence cannot be measured.
No person is the best, my comment to you was a warning. My son is 26 and has enough common sense not to discuss or argue regarding issues he knows little about, a common sense practice you do not practice.
This has been well hashed out on the Social Science board. Here are the links:
ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/vi ⌠p?t=138864
ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/vi ⌠p?t=140011
Here are a few more links to chew on: (metaphor intended)
jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ⌠f22.html#c
ajc.org/InTheMedia/OpinionsD ⌠2&pid=1161
I know many secularists who are quite moral. I have Jewish friends, one is Wiccan who is totally non-violent and vegan. Secularism, separation of church and state, provides protection for all genders, religions and ethnic groups. This does not appear in a theocracy. Many of the religious are very intolerant and generally react with ad hominem attacks, like you do, when questioned regarding faith. It is secularism that helped prevent the continued xenophobic violence between Protestants and Catholics.
Reread your post, the words you used were ad hominem, in red, and were not just a few words. Hum, let me remind you:
Before my reponses to the foulest, most prejudiced thinker on ILP, a comment to Aspacia: The author of this thread genuinely wished to pursue a scholarly talk about a specific topic he raised. If you want to rant (as a perfect characterization of what you deem your philosophical debate), do it elsewhere, this thread is too valuable to be ruined by anyone, much less you and I. You seem to be unable to focus on one topic and speak coherently about it. Every thread Iâve seen you in, you single handedly cause it to spiral into what you want to talk about, which is many loosely related topics that are always the same. Start your own thread. A matter of respect, not a matter of liberty.
You reap what you sow. You insult, you will probably be insulted. You attack a person, you may suffer violent retribution.
Again, an attack. I do not lie and am not politically correct. I do not wish to reveal my institution as I am surrounded with left-leaning liberals and I am moderate. My opinions could put my position in jeopardy. For example, do you believe that a Black individual who is against Affirmative Action (I am for it) can ever obtain a degree in Black studies? Ditto for a woman persuing a degree in feminist literature. Think about it.
[size=134]Greetings to all members of this forum.
I used to be quite active telling (i.e. defending) about the religion which I follow: Islaam. Yes, it is written with two Aâs for phonetical reasons. I used to paste articles of this man called Qaradawi. I have noticed that someone, here in this thread, also refered to his website called IslamOnline.
However some while ago, still searching for the authentic Islaam, I found information about this methodology called Salafiyya. Although some of you may recognize the word âsalafiâ being connected with contemporary âIslamicâ terrorism, I found the contrary. Amazingly enough they, those who follow this methodology, have refuted Osama Ibn Laden explicitly. I was amazed. I used to support this man, Ibn Laden (may Allaah forgive me).
They describe themselves:[/size]
[size=134]
Although the above text may not make any sense to you, it did to me.
After reading much reading material about this group and meeting people who adhere to this methodology, I chose to become one of them: a Salafi.
And I would love to write about my experience. But due to my lack of time at the moment, I advise anyone of you to visit the following website:
fatwa-online.com/
It contains enough information to get a picture of the real Islaam.
If you have any comments or questions just post them here. I will try to answer them if I get some time.
Thank you all for reading.[/size]
You wrote both posts! You responded to yourself you idiot! LOL
Again, i acknowledge the fact that some Muslims use drugs, but pointed out that Islam forbids it. If e.g. Egypt allows alcohol bars/drugs, does not change the fact that Islam forbids it. Because there is murder in Rome does not mean Christianity permits it.
I have no idea what makes you think I know little about Islam. Iâve studied Islam since about 8 years old. Iâve taken Islamic studies courses, advanced ones, Imam training, Shaikh training, taught at an Islamic center in Los Angeles, etc. How could a zionist tell me I donât know Islam, much less one who is not Muslim, has not studied Islam like I, and has an admittedly cynical approach when reading about it, and only cites the USC Muslim Student Association website for Islamic knowledge.
So do I. I am one of them. Donât create my positions for me and then argue against them,
You are foul and prejudiced. This more a true proposition than anything else. And if I wish to point it out, I will. You call âMuslims unevolvedâ speaking for 1.5 billion people and will rebut my calling you prejudiced? You have nerve. If anyone made the statement you did about Jews, blacks, etc. theyâd come under some serious fire, probably by you.
Youâre full of it. I know a liar when I come across one. Your response is so typical, âoh, I canât tell you for privacy reasonsâŚâ I read you in a post a while ago somewhere saying you teach grade school, then you tell me you teach college studentsâŚyouâre so transparent, donât even try it, no one would believe you anywayâŚyou are incoherent. Thirst4metal is probably the most level headed, balanced, fair and logical person on this site. I look at him as my standard of reason here. Because whether his position is right or wrong, whether we agree or not, he is cogent, focused, and thereâs one important standard that he always sticks by: logic! All of his arguments are valid. Iâve never heard him make a comment about anyone as debating inadequately, but he did about you. You might want to consider that you come off as less intelligent than you are (to give you the benefit). You are for sure, not a college instructor, it is clear by your form of speaking. Donât try to bullshit me of all people. You suck me in to your brass debating which I refuse to engage in any further. You ruin every thread you come into. I think there are many here that would agree. In fact, I refuse to debate with you on anything from here on out and I sincerely request that you not participate in the threads I author. You are dismissed.
Thanks Hadj, I will add this to my Favorites. It appears to be valid and I will peruse it.
There is so much bs out there, it is nice to have sources like ILP members to provide insight and great links for understanding.