Islam is a religion with its formation beginning around 1500 years ago.
Allow me to present you with this short story/summation:
The time is circa 600 C.E. and Christianity has abandoned / forgotten its roots and has endured many hypocrites, false prophets, and false doctrines. Mohammed finds that his people (the Arabs) are being persecuted by these same Christians (again, because Christianity has lost its way). The Arabs are losing their land, the land is being taken from outsiders under the pretention that god has given it to them. Thus, the Arabs are in danger of losing their land, their way of life, and even their very existence. Who will protect Mohammed’s people?
Mohammed, must unite his people under one cause and help them to focus. He needs to give his people what they need most: hope + direction. Unity is important because the Arabs are, in actuality, tribes that are LOOSELY held together and entertain various beliefs. How will Mohammed accomplish unification? The answer is god–mankind’s answer to the unknown and to the hopeless situation. Mohammed decides to start a religion that will accomplish his lofty aims.
Mohammed chooses to base the foundation of his new religion on Judaism which already has credibility and many tribes already respect, honor, and partially believe in Judaism. In fact, Judaism not only has credibility, but has birthed a very successful “branch” in Christianity. Mohammed looks at the Christianity and decides that there are many aspects he likes in this religion. Mohammed is a very intelligent person and gets the best of these older, credible religions to form his new religion which will require a lot of submission to god in order to equal the fervor of Christians and Jews. Mohammed, a righteous man, develops his notion of god interspersed with some of the Christian notions and Jewish notions.
The result is Islam which will accomplish the aims of Mohammed: b[/b] His vision of god is furthered and he truly believes that god is glorified. b[/b] Islam has near instant credibility since it is based on the Abrahamic traditions. b[/b] The notions of god that Mohammed has developed has alllowed him to pick and choose which doctrines found in the Gospels and the Torah will actually benefit his people. b[/b] Islam unites his people under one cause (which is a source of strength). b[/b] Islam will lead his people to freedom (spiritually and literally) b[/b] Islam takes advantage (just as all religions do) of the zealots and the fact that mankind is willing to justify ANYTHING for their notion of god. b[/b] Zealots were necessary with the early followers: wars needed fighting, god needed defending, and land needed to be reclaimed.
Now, there is nothing wrong with the above… Christianity has done it and Judaism did it way before either religion. Nearly all religions stem from the notion of god–a creation of mankind’s primitive mind–which stands to reason that all religions will borrow from each other the great ideas that develop/further the notion of god.
Q1: Is my narrative completely inaccurate? If so, please explain. If only partially inaccurate, please detail.
Q2: How has Mohammed chosen which doctrines or “mistakes” are unreliable? Was this a revelation of the Angel Gabriel?
Q3: Is it unfair to compare Islam to Mormons? I mean that both religions claim to have the last revelation from god.
Q4: Does Islam claim to have the last revelation from god?
Q5: Do Muslim scholars truly believe that the Qu’ran is in the precise form that the Prophet Mohammed recited/wrote?
Q6: How has the veracity of this idea that the Qu’ran is untouched been challenged/proven?
Q7: As an outsider looking in, it seems pretty plausible that Mohammed chose and accepted only the teachings/doctrines in the Torah and Gospels that prove and/or do not challenge the notion of god that he developed. On what premise do Muslims accept that Mohammed was a prophet of the devine and not just a prophet of his people?
Q8: Which major teachings in the Torah are not accepted by Islam?
Q9: In the Torah, there are several places where it is intimated that god was as a man, why does Islam outright reject anthropomorphication? Is it purely on the revelations received by Mohammed?
Q10: Essentially, does Islam propose that the Jews screwed up or made up these stories of god as a man?
PLEASE be courteous and stick to the subject(s)/topic(s) of this thread.
so do christians, and mormons, and jews how does that make any of them greater than any others?
again, see 1.
Joe Smith did the same thing and so do fundamentalist christians and orthodox jews. And “benefit” is subjective. I believe, about 1100 AD a sect that became more mainstream started teaching that the bible was corrupted and should not be trusted (another Joe smith teaching). We of course know this is pure nonsense, with the uncovering of ancient scrolls, including the dead sea scrolls.
see 1.
the difference is how muslims pursue this freedom. A buddhist searches the truth through meditation, a muslim pursues the truth (through a misinterpretation of the Quran) through violence.
Or suppression, like the saudis do to women, or how the muslims do in egypt by locking up christian converts.
do certain sects of Islam look down on this behavior? of course just like certain christian sects look down on the KKK christian behavior or the skinhead behavior and a lessor extent of christians feel ashamed of the anti-homosexuality behavior.
agree, but I think that any fundamentalist religion can lead to extreme violence. Timothy McVeigh wasn’t Muslim.
agree with that too, and by reading the books of Joshua, judges, etc (other historical based books) you can see that the jews justified their violence with god as well.
yes but luckily both christianity and judaism have allowed an influx of secularism that islam does not because islam MUST be a central part of the government.
In canadian city where there is a small majority of muslims, they ring a bell for the times to pray to Mecca. They get upset at those who do not pray.
This of course is no different than early mormons that influxed their religion with government, the difference is, even mainstream mormonism bows to the laws of the land concerning equal rights (disavowing polygamy.)
here’s my question(s):
What makes the Quran more holy than the Torah, or the Holy Bible, or the Bhagavad Vita?
Who claimed that any one was greater than any of the others?
Also, I am claiming that Mohammed USED the Abrahamic connection to give his religion credibility… I am not saying it is credible because it is based on the Abrahamic traditions. I am claiming that Mohammed, like the religious INVENTORS before him, borrowed from a ‘credible’ source to give his new religion credibility. I don’t think I made this clear or you really misunderstood. Who said this makes them greater than or less than any other religion?
On your #4, religions are SUPPOSED to unite his people, who said that this makes them greater than or less than any other religion?
What is your point?
You are saying all Muslims? Most Muslins? Half of the Muslims? Some Muslims? I disagree–the search of freedom through religion has ALWAYS been the same for all of the Abrahamic religions. Full worship of god = reward of land = glory to the people. Your generalization is fallacious… and unwelcome.
You know, I think back to when Catholicism was in power and how fairly Catholic extremists treated women, or for that matter Jews, or Arabs, or pagans… The reign of the Papacy was no better; however, is that really an indication of the religion or of some extremists’ version of the religion?
By your interpretation, at its heart, is Judaism a fundamentalist religion? How would you categorize slaughtering all males + grown women because they didn’t believe in a particular god? Is that fundamentalist for you? I DO NOT THINK that Judaism is intent merely fundamentalist dogma. Some of it, certainly, but not all of it.
The Jews did it a few thousand years ago… the Christians did it about two thousand years ago, and the Muslims did it about one thousand years ago. Each of these religions, at its core, are not intended for evil.
From what I have read and been explained, Islam can coexist with any government. What do you base your claim on that it “MUST” be a central part of the government?
I never claimed that the Quran is more holy than any religion… why do you ask this? Aren’t you repeating my questions Q6 + Q7?
Also, no one ever claimed that Mohammed was more devine than Christ. In fact, my understanding is that Mohammed was NOT divine at all… that Mohammed was ONLY a prophet that received divine MESSAGE? If you meant the message then this is a question was already asked in Q7. Also, don’t get me wrong, I no sooner accept a divine message as a divine man…
Do me a favor everyone, READ my post thoroughly before commenting…
every single one of those religions I listed claim they are in some way greater than the others.
certainly no more than judaism is credible because it’s founded on the fictional character of abraham/moses.
I didn’t, I meant that they themselves claim superiority over other religions
I guess that’s my fault again for not making my point clearer.
that picking and choosing scriptures isn’t a unique attribute to Islam.
let’s look at what jews did to “get the reward of the land” it was just as bad as what the believers of Islam did and have done.
as far as being fallacious? I don’t see how. The truth is always ugly and always unwelcome T4M.
If you can’t tell I’m not PC, and I’m not going to lie to make something seem pretty and good.
how many muslims are like that? all of saudi arabia, most of egypt, beyond that is probably at least half of the middle eastern sects of Islam are focused on the violent spectrum.
while Judaism and Christianity are rarely literally practicing the bible, sects of Islam still are. Why do you fail to see this as a problem?
If a sect of christians suddenly decided to say it was ok to have slaves and beat them within an inch of their lives because it says so in the new testament would you be ok with that?
I thought I equally pointed out that all religions are equal?
It just so happens that a majority of Islam is still practicing the madness in the Qu’ran literally, and very few christians are, and if they are it’s just to stop homosexual rights, or the catholic church promoting the ineffectiveness of condoms - nothing like stoning people though.
certainly not all of it, I think that in america there is a stronger leaning for fundamentalist christianity, then in other parts of the world, just like Islam has a higher tendency to go fundamentalist in the Arab part of the world.
the difference again is in their actions.
The Muslims are still doing it and the fundie jews are doing it by supplanting muslims/palestinians from Israel to move in jews.
I disagree, I think each religion at it’s core is fatally flawed.
Look around the Arab world, how many secular governments do you see?
(besides Saddham Hussein who we took out to replace with an Islam Republic.)
That question wasn’t intended for you it was intended for believers of Islam, or christianity (reversing which one is holier)
Islam teaches this… It’s a core teaching that Mohammed is a greater prophet than Jesus.
I was only answering your points and not even getting to your questions, I feel some of my rebuttals answered your questions though.
Q1, Q2, Q3 were all answered. I think it’s completely fair to compare the “prophet” situation of Mormonism to Islam.
Q4. As far as I know yes. Of course the new testament claims that too, and the mormons claim that the testaments never stop coming.
Q5. from the research I’ve done it used to be a majority that thought it was not written by him, and most of it was written much later after his death. but that was supplanted by what would become the violent arm of Islam in the 1100 - 1200 range… I’d have to search for the source on that.
Q6. Most scholars that have looked at the earlier sources have noted changes, just like the many editorial changes to the book of mormon… note the bible has had maybe .05% textual difference from the earliest known sources.
Q7. I can’t answer that I’m not muslim.
Q8. that would probably vary by sect.
Q9. that will probably vary by sect as well.
Q10. As far as I know, jews don’t believe that “god as man” literally… if you look at the bible it was the trickster who tempted us with “you shall be as gods”.
Christians believe that it relates to Jesus.
T4M, in searching for the truth on something you are going to find skeletons in the closet. It just happens that the skeletons in the Islam closet are still decomposing, and not dead.
Scythekain, perhaps you misunderstand what I am seeking… If I were studying Christianity I would first concentrate on a small section of Christianity then I would move my way around to other sections… finally, I would take in the whole of the religion. Every time I try to focus on one particular section of Islam detractors are everywhere discussing the violence inherent in this religion. Why don’t you first let me discover more about doctrine before I get to practice? I would appreciate it… as for your post:
To you and to me, religion has no credibility; however, to those that hold the notion of god as truth, religions are often assigned credibility. So, yes, Islam is no more credible than Judaism or Christianity; however, I see the fact that Islam is as credible as very impressive. Why? Because it was smart of Islam’s inventor (Mohammed) to attach itself to the Abrahamic tradition. Also, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam each claim superiority with regards to the god of Abraham. Picking and choosing scriptures isn’t unique to any religion… I think I made that point in my first post.
The truth is not about aesthetics and it is always welcome… sorry you don’t feel that way. The funny thing is, you are agreeing with me and I am not sure if you know it… I too said that Muslims and Jews (and later Christians) all fought for land under the ‘authority’ and ‘endorsement’ of god.
I am the one arguing that WRONG = WRONG remember? I just happen to disagree with some of the points you made because I am not certain about the information you have, if you want to help me then do not give me your conclusions (your results or your answers). Why don’t you provide me with the factual information to let me judge for myself?
OK… there are approximately 1.5 billion Muslims. Let’s see… Saudi Arabia = 27 million, + Most (98%?) of Egypt = 68.5 million, + half of the other Middle Eastern region countries 410 million (this includes non Arab countries like Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, & Afghanistan) = 205 million. The grand total is 300.5 million Muslims that are violent… This represents about 20% of the total Muslim population. I am not sure if that extreely generous 20% qualifies as a condemnation of Islam…
I didn’t say it was not a problem. I am a secularist. I only say that I want to learn more than just that there is a problem. I can see that the sky is blue, I want to know what it is made of, how is got there, why it doesn’t go away, how long it will be there… So many questions… why do you not want me to learn about these?
Of course not. However, I would be interested in listening to their logic behind it. Why? Because I am curious about why humans accept these types of things. Why are so many of my colleagues near atheists but they will be damned if their child ever becomes something other than Presbyterian or Methodist, or [insert religion here]??? I am curious.
And yet so many people love their faith and love god… I want to understand why… the best way is not to dismiss the religion as you do. If you want to, that’s your business, but try not to be a barrier to my attempt to learn. I respect you and I think you respect me. Thus, you should minimally, you will allow me to ask questions about segments on anything I want to know. I can’t know how a finished good becomes so until I review it step by step.
The Arab world represents 18% of the Muslim population… does 18% to 25% signify the majority to you?
Christianity teaches that Jesus was the greatest prophet… remember Jesus’ words that ‘before Abraham and Moses, I AM.’ So, Moses is less than Jesus is less than Mohammed… Or Moses is greater than Jesus who is greater than Mohammed, or Jesus is… The point is that OF COURSE each religion will champion its prophet as the best. However, Islam cannot teach that Mohammed is divine since they do not believe in anthropomorphication.
Thanks for you input on the questions… Could you please search for the source and cite it? As for, interpretations, Yes, I understand that everyone has their own interpretations. Overall, all religions were simply inventions by man which leaves room for a lot of interpretation.
Skeletons and decomposing corpses are cool and interesting. That is why I want to learn!
(Q1) I don’t know thirst, were the Meccans, Medinans, and generally the Arabs of the peninsula really threatened by Christianity to that extent? Judaism seemed to be penetrating these tribes much more than Christianity (doctrine wise, not militarily). Abyssinia was a relatively near Christian kingdom. The sitting King was rather tolerant, and was not the crusader/conquest type of guy. Please offer more historical insights on the Christian threat at the time, I personally do not find your characterization to be the case, as far as having such a great threat to Arabs that Mohammad felt the need to unify Arabia for purposes of defense from Christianity (or even as a secondary motivator, or motivation in part; by default…). I will take the position that Christianity did not pose such an imminent threat so that I can draw a rebuttal from you, so that we can gauge the role of “the Christian threat” at the time.
(Q1) continued----This characterization assumes a great deal about Mohammad, namely, his life circumstances, geography, his having access to literature from Judaism and Christianity, and his contact with other religions. Your paragraph above also assumes that Mohammad was literate. In fact, Mohammad was illiterate, this is a historically confirmed fact (so far as historians have power). As for geography, how much contact did Mohammad really have with Jews and Christians? He lived in Mecca. Mecca was an idol worshipping society with no real Christian or Jewish presence. He did travel as a merchant, but I implore you to confirm if his travels were long enough for him to correspond (orally, since he was illiterate) with Jews and Christians for long enough, frequently enough, and effectively to include the texts in the very lengthy Qur’an.
Same questions above apply here.
Agreed, whether he is a false Prophet or real, unless he really pulled one on us.
Disagree. Mecca was not a Christian nor Jewish society in any significant, or even insignificant way. The Abrahamic tradition was seen as non sense by the Meccans, that is, if Meccans largely knew about either of Christianity or Judaism. Rather, Mohammad was almost killed and Muslims suffered persecution etc. by the idol worshipping Meccans for introducing these ideas. If I take (2) in another sense however, meaning, Islam was not some new radical idea out of nowhere, people learned that thousands nearby follow these ideas, I agree with you.
(Q2) answered here----But there’s an assumption in (3). Namely, that Mohammad did the choosing, and was not instructed to do so by Angel Gabriel who delivered the message from God. The Qur’an pretty much contains the Old Testament if you read it, it is not much deviated except for the parts that talk about God in an anthropomorphic manner, namely, God created the world in six days, the rested, etc. In any case, the picking and choosing charge, in my opinion, would not really help him much. Had Mohammad included the Old Testament as was at the time in Jerusalem for instance, taken it, stuck it in with his verses, and called it the Qur’an. The “new” Islamic verses (I use this term not to draw a distinction between the verses Mohammad received and the stories of the old Prophets, Muslims consider the Old Testament stories as part of Islam since Muslims are to believe in them) to my knowledge did not really pose a conflict with the Old Testament that the Jews held, and Christians accepted at the time. Point is, there was no utilitarian/functional interest of significance for Mohammad to “nip and tuck” the Old Testament.
The New is a whole different story. There were more than one alterations, or as Muslims would deem them: restorations. Example: Muslims believe in the Virgin Mary, immaculate conception, and venerate Jesus as a Prophet of God, not the son since this denotes God as some sort of human type. So as for the New Testament, there were alterations made.
But thirst, why would Mohammad go through all this instead of just taking the Gospels and preaching Jesus is the son of God, all the Xian views, etc.? Why start this new religion if his only interest is unity, order, and as we all will find, to establish social order, to serve the wayfarer, to accept all as equals, to “walk with ho’s and Arabs” etc. Wouldn’t helping spread an already established faith be more practical. Wouldn’t taking Christianity as was, give more credibilty than its edition (Islam)? I look forward to a rebuttal from anyone to get either my or thirsts position grounded regarding the beneficiality (is that a real word) of “changing” the Torah, Bible.
True. But Mohammad wanted to unite the world by allowing religious freedom. Many do not know this, but Mohammad and the Muslims had an alliance with a very powerful Jewish tribe in Medina. In fact, the head Rabbi and Mohammad joined forces and their men fought alongside one another at one point.
His people were already free. They were free idol worshippers. Mohammad was from the Quraish tribe (who later turned on him for starting Islam). The Quraish tribe was the head dominant tribe, the tribe of power and wealth. So if we are to speak of “Mohammad’s people,” his people were the aristocracy. He fought for social justice, against slavery, against female infanticide (female infanticide outlawed and punishable by death once Islamic laws were enforced). Slavery, however did continue, however, to some degree, in some places as Islam rapidly spread. What accounts for its toleration even in its slightest of instances? Or why it could not be enforced? I don’t know. But for one who might take the cynical position that Mohammad was a functionary (as many here will I suspect), I would offer the following response: We must realize that as a leader, Mohammad had to bring change in a temperate and strategic manner, so as not to draw chaos and rebellion. The laws on alcohol are a perfect example. It was not unconditionally outlawed at first (though slavery was, at least in proclamation). At first, you couldn’t come to Friday prayer drunk, then you can’t come to the mosque drunk, then you can’t pray drunk (prayer 5 times throughout day, kinda hard to sober up with prayer one hour away) then no alcohol at all (don’t quote me step by step). Mohammad was instituting change that he intended continue upward for the long term. Therefore, one might point out that he was not a total deontologist. But in response to “leading his people to freedom,” I would say that his people were already free, more, they were powerful and wealthy. He fought for people outside of his circle.
Well, this is a claim that has an anchored assumption. All I would do is offer a new starting premise.
If we look at Mohammad’s life, while he was alive, war mongerers, zealots, etc. were contained and/or marginalized. But as soon as Mohammad died, there was an election where Ali was not present, a disagreement by those who favored him (hence split: Sunni vs. Shi’a) and it was human business as usual after that. Mohammad started a revolution for social justice, after his death, leaders sought the basics: wealth, power, influence and domination, and within years, Islam became an empire, seeking land and exerting influence on the world…business as usual my friends, not a Muslim invention. But we must focus on the legacy of Mohammad, what he preached while alive.
Well, as we know, its a matter of faith. The allusion in Q3 is that these religions are man made. But in this instance, more common sense is applicable. The Mormons have some ideas that are what I call “leaving the reservation.” I won’t get into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, but thirst, there is quite a difference in the claims these two faiths make. Mohammad instituted many normative, civil laws that were practical. Jurisprudence is a big part of Islam. And contrary to popular belief, women were given many rights as an example, including right to own their own property, inheritance rights, right to marry a person of choice, to refuse a suitor, right to divorce, etc. These just roll off our backs now as we read this, but this was big news then, you must attempt to appreciate how radical this was then. Further, as for honor killings we have today, sexual purity was a big deal to pre-Islamic Arabia. The culture survived. Muslims do not have a monopoly over fascination with virgins. Consider the Aztecs who held virgin girls in such high esteem, they threw them into fire pits for the gods. But extremists aside, virginity is valued cross culturally in my opinion. Why? That’s for the psych. forum maybe. As for Islam, accusing a girl for hanky panky for example was always a big deal in Arabia, far prior to Islam. Honor killings did not begin with the birth of Islam. Hell, they were burying female babies alive in pre-Islamic Arabia because they were seen as a burden. The lack of value of females, their degradation, etc. did not begin at sexual maturity for these people. Islam halted these crimes. The new Islamic jurisprudence required three eye witnesses for such accusations of infidelity, pre-marital sex, etc. This, as you can imagine, made it very difficult to prove a womans guilt of such a crime. Women enjoyed far more protections and benefits in many respects. There is more to Islam than Fox News and CNN reporting a Muslim is holding a journalist hostage for religious purposes today. It has had such appeal since its birth, and Islam is the fastest growing religion not only in the world today, but also in America. I invite you all to see why.
I would implore you all to investigate this religion as you do a work of philosophy. Give it careful consideration. Study of Islam requires what study of philosophy does: patience, temperance, and the resistance to come to hastily drawn conclusions, among other things. We have thousands of years of interpretations on ancient philosophy being debated. Islam is not to be viewed by an intimidating sounding sentence in the Qur’an, deemed bigoted, and discarded. It is as complex as ancient Greek philosophy, if not moreso. Islam demands such scholarship in study.
Not so. Some Muslims may feel this way, or even teach it. But Islam does not offer a ranking of the Prophets like Rick Dees’ top 40. If you found some ranking chart in the Qur’an, let me know…
Well, I am not certain about the timeline, but if I am correct, Persians and Christians were fighting over this region circa 600 C.E. (I believe the Persians had conquered much of the area). Wasn’t one of the major conflicts in those times between Muslims and Persians too? Basically, there was war and I believe the Arabs had to defeat a superior army to regain its land. The premise is that some war inspired Mohammed to create his religion to unite the peopole.
You could be right, it could have been the Persians (Iranians) that posed a threat. In either case, the people needed to have hope because there were wars in those times.
No, the paragraph did not assume literacy. Mohammed was an intelligent man and literacy is not a prerequisite to intelligence. Illiteracy is irrelevant because it was common practice of Christians to preach the gospels on the streets EVERYWHERE they went. Christians traveled far and wide. Since Christianity also taught the Torah, you can understand where he could have received his idea to create a new religion. The same applies to Jesus and to Moses–they saw an opportunity and took it.
Wasn’t Mecca taken after Mohammed began religion? Mohammed didn’t need to go to them, they would go near him–enough to receive precisely what he wanted to hear. His merchant travels would have exposed him to various religions and various beliefs–if not necessarily in detail with sufficient information to help him begin the premise of a new religion. I am not saying that Mohammed did not believe his new religion was from god only that it may have been wishful thinking. Again, literacy has very little to do with it.
Irrelevant. The Christians suffered similar persecution. The Christians based their religion on various different religions too, like the Greek and Egyptian gods. Borrowing from a religion does not mean you have to be an expert on it–you only need to like its premise. The Middle East was exposed to Christianity in very clear ways–look at the interactions between the the Byzantine empire and the Persian empire… That’s a very wide geographic area. However, I did allude to the fact taht people learned that thousands nearby followed the god of Abraham and thus Islam was not some new radical idea–it was to Judaism what Christianity originally was.
Basically, we have to accept the premise that Mohammed was a prophet first before we can accept that his revelation in the form of the Qur’an is accurate. So, if we accept Mohammed’s version we must accept that the previous instances of the Torah were incorrect. That is, that the scribes, who paid so much attention to detail screwed up or that the priests flat out lied–which really endangers all the Abrahamic religions.
Except for the various instances of god as man… coincidence?
Which begs the question, how come Jesus’ teachings were butchered and not Muhammed’s? Divine intervention? Basically, we are forced to accept that another religion got it wrong and finally we have it right.
The problem is that Mohammed saw the flaws of Christianity and saw the corruption taking place within Christianity. He would not free his people and lead them into a righteous relationship with god; instead, he would lead them to sin and apostacy. No, Mohammed needed to establish his own religion, much the way Jesus needed to establish his own.
My history is a bit rusty, but my understanding is that the Arabs were under Christian or Persian rule circa 600 C.E.
Which is normal of men to do–to want to change the bad. I think that Mohammed must have believed in Allah and thought that he was doing this according to the will of god.
Not my recollection of history… but I could be wrong.
Thanks so much for your detailed response. It is most welcome. I will have to begin studying Islam in detail along with historically relevant information. I think this will take a few years.
Its not that the former got it wrong, but that it was altered, some things out, some things added e.g. the institution of Priesthood (correct me if Im wrong). Islam purports to be perceived more as a restoration, than a new religion. Of course, this will take us back to the initial question and a circular debate has begun.
But I really gotta get to my finals. So I must leave the rest of the rebuttals for later, I know I said this before, but I gotta do it this time…its crunch time. I’m taking 23 units, 2 of which are grad. level classes. So thirst, I hereby appoint you the defender of Islam til after my finals are over, since there is no one else here to do it. Since I know you have not necessarily researched Islam, etc. in a substantial way, just identify everyone’s mistakes in logic and put out the fires for now. Until I return, peace from AVICENNA
“Muhammad had gown up in the pagan society of Mecca. One of his sons, Abd Manaf, bore a pagan name. Mecca was a holy place famed for the Kaaba, the earthly abode of many gods. [. . .] Moreover, the ideas and teaching of Judaism and Christianity had spread and become known in Mecca through, slaves, pilgrims, and traders […] Muhammad and Islam in 615 entered a new period […] Monotheism was plainly recognized, the opposition and persecution began [emphasis mine]. Muslims were subjected to tongue-lashing […] garbage waas dumped on their doors […]individuals were beaten.” (Fisher and Ochsenwald 28-29)
This history texts denotes that it was the pagans who persecuted Islam and probably Christians and Jews.
Yes, I tend to agree with your thesis.
I have to disagree with this, as most of the Christians and Jews were slaves or pilgrims or traders without much power. They were acknowledged, but most of the Arab tribes were pagan. Hey, many historians, and generally all “expert” academics often have divergent conclusions. We can agree to disagree.
Yes, I agree, but he did turn nasty when the Jews ridiculed him for reciting the Torah out of context and added verses. At first Muslims prayed to Jerusalem, then switched to where the Kaaba is because of this ridicule
No, the first converts were his kit and kin and most were young men of not great social standing. They felt inferior to those whose wealth, and influence put them at the top of the food chain. Islam brought the new ideas of individualism which threatened the wealthier members of society.
There were not that many converts to begin with. About 305 of them went up against 800 - 900 Meccans and won.
I tend to agree with picking, choosing and also believe he created new rules to benefit his people, especially the one regarding alcohol.
Somewhat, but generally on track.
Always remember not only did Mohammed claims that both Gabriel and Satan spoke to him.
No, it is not unfair, and the Mormoms added verses too.
I believe that Muslims will say “Yes.” Please correct me if mistaken.
I believe so, but some academic scholars found some interesting evidence regarding the Qur’an:
This was found in a edu site and I found it interesting, you might too.
Many Christians and Jews have challenged it. A few academic Muslim’s, not theologians have challenged it. I believe there is an progressive Islamic media source that does so, I will review the MEMRI articles for reference.
I will have to research. I know many claim the victory at Mecca is a miracle, but this claim is made by the Israelis regarding the 1948 battle that they won against the Arab world.
Actually, there are many nasty comments in Islamic religious texts describing Jews as swine and apes. Much of the Kosher diet resembles Islamic diet. Also, Jews do not pray five times a day.
I believe so.
Yes, this and much more. Ditto for the Christians.
I believe I am on topic. Also, thanks for saving me the time researching the violence in the Bible, this includes the Torah.
I will start a new thread regarding Islamic laws. I do become nasty when others tell me what to do or think.
Who claimed that any one was greater than any of the others?
Thirst, you made the Mormon analogy. Scythekain is on topic.
BTW: Scythekain: Scythia is an ancient region of Asia. and Scythian is a member of the ancient nomadic people there. It is also an extince Iranian language. Any connection?
The the Sharia laws, I do not think so. Many Muslims are trying to legalize these laws in their Western communitys.
and something else to think about, the muslim population as of 2000 was 1.1 billion… and it’s growing at an insane rate…
and as aspacia correctly pointed out:
Many European countries that are facing rising Muslim majorities are running into this. if you think the christians rising in power in America is bad, wait until you see what the muslims do over the next 10 -15 years.
because unfortunately we don’t preach logic and reason like we do god, the illogical and unreason of Islam (and other religions that it will be replacing) rule the current political state.
think about it… the population is currently 1/6th of the world, and that 1/6th of the world has some of the worst human rights violations (outside of communist china - but that’s a whole other topic.).
Do you think this is a coincidence?
let’s look at the world map again and some of the headlines:
Mr. Abass is a christian convert the government is jailing because he is a convert.
I could go down the list of the countries on that list, but really what’s the point?
thanks for clearing that up.
Right, the difference is the muslims are still doing it.
believe me I remember
I think that the world isn’t black and white though.
while it was wrong for the papacy to condemn condoms calling them “uneffective” at preventing AIDS, is it equal to the egyptian government jailing a man for being christian?
I don’t know… I think the latter is a worse shade of gray. though honestly it could go the other way… condemning millions of Africans to the AIDS virus is pretty despicable in and of itself.
maybe the condom example wasn’t the best comparison for Wrong = wrong? LOL.
lol, that reminds me of when I was four and I asked my religious parents “why is the sky blue”
“because god made it blue, son”
even then I didn’t accept that answer. And I know you won’t, and that’s what your going to get from anyone who believes in any concept of god.
Why are we here? What is our purpose?
chalk it all up to god. If you want to believe that fine, but I know you don’t.
I’d be curious too, though I have a feeling I already answered it above.
from using the non-scientific pond of ILP most of the reasons people believe in god are grounded in pure speculation.
There usually is no logic nor reason, are you ready to accept that?
I’ve got no problem with that, I think you are a brilliant poster and love debating with you.
I just sometimes dislike how “colorful” your posts can get
Here is a Rutgers University Religious Department link for your search regarding faith. Faith is very comforting for the faithful and many studies show that many of the faithful are happier than cynics. I don’t know, I enjoy my life of curiousity. virtualreligion.net/vri/
You are correct, think, listen, then come to your own conclusions and do not let others tell you what to think or do. This one of my pet peeves. Who died and made anyone God to tell me what I should or should not do or think. Albeit, I do follow the laws of land, that my society has implemented, but I can always choose to leave if I dislike the laws.
Hey thirst, you may be interested in Irshad Manj’s The Trouble With Islam. I just picked it up and it is facinating. Her web page is muslim-refusnik.com
Thirst, I almost forgot, Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses is hilarious, very close to Monty Python’s Holy Grail. I just read the first two chapters and do not understand what the big stink is about.
Some while ago she/he had put the same statement on this board. I refuted it.
Funny that scythekain is still lying about this issue. Why do you make it so easy to expose your lying character?
Anyway, here is a true core lesson in Islaam (again):
Say (O Muslims), “We believe in Allâh and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Ibrâhim (Abraham), Ismâ’il (Ishmael), Ishâque (Isaac), Ya’qûb (Jacob), and to Al-Asbât [the twelve sons of Ya’qûb (Jacob)], and that which has been given to Mûsa (Moses) and 'Iesa (jesus), and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we have submitted (in Islâm).” (Al-Baqarah 2:136)
ok hadj, they’re equal by that statement. Just a couple of questions.
Do all sects of Islam feel the same?
If you feel that Christ was equal to Mohammed why don’t you value the New Testament as much as the Qu’ran?
If you answered that the Qu’ran is more important, tell me how you can feel that way about Mohammed’s work yet still feel that Mohammed and Christ were equals?
My assertation that the Islam stance of equality is not rooted in any logical assertations because of their other feelings on christianity.
feel free to answer my questions though, please hadj.
There is something typical about you, scythekain. It is rare to see you ask questions and if you do, you ask many questions at the same time.
I am familiar with this [ugly and chaostic] form of debating. Trying ‘not to lose’ the debate, I must answer them all. As experience has learned us, you reply by reacting on every given answer. At that point the ‘quote’ function becomes a natural standard.
I friendly advice you, scythekain, next time to formulate only one strong question each time. If an issue has been ‘solved’, or something near that, pose your next strong question. A friendly advice.
I will try my utmost best to answer all questions, which you have posed to me. However, trying to avoid a situation like I described, I will not further answer questions. Because I believe there are a lot of good Islâmic websites which have great resources, even for those who are unfamiliar with this beautiful religion. I advice you to visit salaf.dk : a portal of excellent Islâmic resources in many languages.
Probaly not. Some think that Ali, the grandson of Muhammed (peace be upon him), is much greater [some Shia’s]. Some even dare to say there has come another prophet [Nation of Islam(?), Ahmadiyya].
However what is more important are the true teachings of Islâm, as stated in the Quraan, in the Hadith and the interpretation of the three generations after Muhammed’s death.
In fact, if you knew the basics of Islâm, you would have know that believing in all Books is obligatory. May come as a surprise for some. But let us take a Quranic verse:
And He (Allâh) will teach him ['Iesa (jesus)] the Book and Al-Hikmah (i.e. the Sunnah, the faultless speech of the Prophets, wisdom, etc.), (and) the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel). (Aali Imran 3:48)
Secondly, while quoting a non-Islâmic source, Wikipedia.org:
There are six basic beliefs shared by all Muslims:
Belief in God, the one and only one worthy of all worship.
Belief in all the Prophets and Messengers (sent by God).
Belief in the Books sent by God.
Belief in the Angels.
Belief in the Day of Judgment (Qiyamah) and in the Resurrection.
Belief in Destiny (Fate) (Qadaa and Qadar in Arabic).
However, it has been confirmed, and not only Muslims take this stance of view, that all previous books have been corrupted. And this is what most Muslims believe. So we do not believe the bible in your local church is the actual Bible.
All scholars agree that all good of the previous Books, can be found in the Last Book, the Qurân. And if my memory is right this is stated in the Qurân itself.
everyone does that. Look at T4M, he posed several questions in the starting thread. This is how debate works. You ask a line of questions and then the other person answers those questions the questioner responds (where appropriate) then starts a new line of questioning. it has nothing to do with winning or losing the debate.
I’m not going to change the way I debate to make it easier. If I asked one question at a time it would break up the line of questions that are related and break their relevancy which is important. It would also make an already long thread needlessly longer.
ok then in some sense my statement wasn’t completely incorrect was it?
which much like the bible can be interpreted 9 ways to sunday. You can state “you’re taking it out of context” but, even that is open to interpretation.
so how often have you read the new testament vs the quran? Do you in your mind hold the value of each of these books equally?
interesting. Have you compared this to other beliefs? Like the christians, jews, mormons, and local pagan arabs?
mm hmm, this is the answer I was waiting for.
The discovery of the dead sea scrolls (and other similiar scrolls) have validated modern translations including the antiquated King James version of the “holy bible”
In fact most modern translation go back to the VERY oldest texts to and compare all the texts and use the most of the disparaging words are not in the context but in the semantics of action. Basically the words between the words. The context is still there.
Knowing that the bible is not a flawed translation, does that change your view of the Qu’ran?
(or of the bible for that matter)
you forgot something in that statement.
All ^ISLAM^ scholars agree…
Secular scholars will probably look at all books with a skeptical (and IMO a correct) approach.
Christians will view the collection made by the catholics the best.
JW’s have a similiar view to you that the bible is flawed and released their own translation which on context doesn’t match the original texts.
Mormon’s also believe the bible translations are flawed and Joe smith made his own flawed translation that doesn’t match the context of the original texts as well as writing his own text down of the nephites and lamanites.
My point is your painting with a broad brush from your perspective. The scholars you care about view the Qu’ran in the best light.
for closing I thought about placing a contradiction from the “holy books”
the bible:
“Heb.11:17
“By faith Abraham when he was tried, offered up Isaac, … his only begotten son.””
“Gen.16:15
“And Hagar bare Abraham a son: and Abram called his son’s name, which Hagar bare, Ishmael.””
the Qu’ran
gen 11:25 And Nahor lived after he begat Terah an hundred and nineteen years, and begat sons and daughters. Nahor lived 148 years.
11:26 And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran.
The Cattle 6:74
“(Remember) when Abraham said unto his father Azar: Takest thou idols for gods ? Lo! I see thee and thy folk in error manifest.”
2 Nephi 5:15
And I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance.
2 Nephi 5:16
And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land…
Hadj, I’m a skeptic. I see all religions in the same light.
Hadj:
Would you like the verses that deny this statement? I have them. Also, in Islamic countries they do discriminate against Jew and Christians, and totally reject any other faith. In Saudi Arabia they shred the Bible in their airports.
If you have the courage I challenge you to read The Trouble With Islam. It is written by a woman raised in the Islamic faith, but moved to the secular west. She developed serious doubts regarding Islam and how it is practiced. She details much of Islamic history, the good, the bad, and the ugly. She discusses her fears regarding dogs, especially black dogs steming from Islamic teachings. There is nothing regarding how bad dogs are in the Qur’an. There is much much more.
This is aspacia’s challenge to all Muslims.
Ah, vacation is over and I am back to work. I know many will give a big sigh of relief and Mr. AD will probably stand-up in cheer.
Also, any nonMuslims will find this book interesting.
