If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
The "Islam Is Peace" campaign...
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The problem that I have about Muhammed having a child wife is this :
If Muhammed's Allah is all-knowing and Allah's message is incorruptible and for all time, why didn't Allah know about the physical harm child sex has on a human being? Furthermore, why didn't Allah FORSEE the controversy that his 'prophet' would cause in later times by taking such a young bride bride? This is far bigger issue than that it was just an 'acceptable' practice from those times.
Muhammed was allowed as many wives as he wanted (I think the limit for other Muslims is three) and of any age. Why was he ALLOWED to take a child wife unless it was because he made up rules according to his whim at the time?
While there are lots of fingers to point at Christianity (for example), Jesus Christ himself was PERSONALLy responsible for the death of .... zero people! Muhammed, on the other hand, was PERSONALLY responsible for the death of tens of thousands of innocents.
By the way, I know that there is a valued colleague of yours who works for TheSite who is a Muslim and I understand that it must be very hurtful for him to read debates liked this for which, on a personal note, I am very, very sorry. It is so hard to debate issues like this without causing deep offence.
Where is your criticism there, I wonder...
What about the Muslim countries not governed by Sharia?
So yet again we someone else trying to paint more than 1bn people with the same brush because of what it says in their holy book while at the same time ignoring the atrocities peddled by their favoured holy book.
Yawn x 94,000,000
Hello Jim, this is Baal. I saw Sanitize's post at the forum at faithfreedom.org.
I agree that the verse about "Whoever killed a human is as if he killed the entire humanity" is one of the most abused verses in the koran. I have posted dozens of editorial in local and university newspapers to reply to people using that verse. All I had to do was post the complete paragraph.
Two month ago 500 muslim scholars came together to condemn terrorism. They made a letter condeming jihadists to hell instead of of martyrdom. It was a very positive letter. The first I have ever seen in my entire life. Of a muslim condeming or criticizing another muslim. Although the letter did not criticize or condemn 'past' suiciders and only condemned suiciders going against the teachings of islam.
Which is Taqqeya language means, it does not condemn suiciders going along the teachings of islam. But hey, at least it is a tiny, minuscule act of taqqeya in the right direction.
Now the verse they brought forward was that sugar-coated 5:32.
And I really felt sorry for those 500 muslim scholars and social leaders. They ALL know what 5:32-35 is really about. They have 6666 verses in their koran. They could have picked ANYTHING they wanted. Anything peaceful. Anything that is maybe falsely translated in a nice way. There was not any they could pick that was better.
They picked the cream of the crop. You may now sit back and start considering how morally bankrupt this book really is. I am not saying that books need to be morally or ethically enlightening but a book about religion should not be morally bankrupt. I will even make a blank claim that based on my observation & calculations less then 70 verses are about doing good to humanity. That is less then 1% of the book. And the goodness is not enlightening or spiritual. Just minimum congeniality stuff.
Another 1% of the koran is about muslims doing good things to muslims. The rest of the book is about how to deal with the critics of islam and the apostate of islam and examples about what did islam do in the past to its critics. One good verse states that if they go for peace then stop attacking them. And That is the other verse that muslims like to quote.
But if you read before it and after it and you realize that the condition for the enemies to offer peace is if they establish regular prayer and pay the zakat (muslim tax), so as I said, the good is never absolutely good or enlightening or even spiritual.
Now I might be writing BS about the 1%. But by how much am I wrong by? 1 more percent?
To answer your quote:
"but when others are stressing that only the original text should be used to decide the position of Islam"
The position of Islam can ONLY be measured by the original text and the sources of islam. I have no other way to measure Islam by.
The position of Muslims can be measured by their original text and by their achievements and traditions within or without the framework of islam.
Also in another quote you criticized that we are calling "Muhammad a Pedophile". You stated that it was allowed in his time.
I would like to bring to your attention the following points:
* A man practicing sex with people of the same sex 2000yrs ago is a homosexual even if it was allowed at the time.
* A man banging dead bodies is a necrophile today even if it was allowed in his time.
* Muhammad was not permitted to marry Aisha as per the customs. Muhammad was Aisha's father blood-brother. He was according to customs her Blood-Uncle and Muhammad had to abolish the custom of "blood-brotherhood" the same night he proposed to her Father.
* So Muhammad lusted for her and had intercourse with her when she was 9yrs old and he was 53yrs old.
* Frankly I do not care about Greeks being pederasts or Muhammad being a pedophile in his time. It does not matter to me.
* I also do not care that Ghenkis Khan would slaughter an entire city AFTER he opened it.
So even though, Muhammad was a pedophile in his own time AGAINST the local customs of his time which he changed. I do not care about pedophiles 1400yrs ago. Hell I do not even care about pedophiles in another country today if their country allows consentual sex between adults and children.
I will protest against the laws of the country but I do not directly blame its citizens. The problem with Muhammad is as follows. As per Koran. Muhammad is "Uswa Hasana", the good example. His life is an example to be followed for all place and for all time.
So now, today, in islamic countries, in my second country, old men are marrying little girls and their society sees nothing wrong with it. Any opposition is met by "this is the Sunna of Muhammad to be Followed".
So all I am doing when I am criticizing against Muhammad, is that I am protesting against the Law. The law that we have to follow the examples set by Muhammad. AT LEAST, I need for the average muslim to KNOW what law he is so fundamentally abiding by. When the average Muslim screams "Sharia Law Sharia Law" I need to educate that muslim what Sharia Law is.
Thanx and now I will go look around the rest of the forum.
You often refer to the Old Testament ....
You found this site and this topic by accident - and you have such an opnion? Smells like some sort of setup to me.
Of course, the majority of Christians dismiss the nauseating hatred in most of the Old Testament, preferring instead to concentrate on the good bits. By pure coincidence just like the majority of Muslims do with the Koran.
If only certain people could see this as clearly as the rest of us...
It is part of 'the Bible', but New Testament supercedes the Old Testament. Jesus Christ is regarded as the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy and the Law. In a Christian context, the laws of the Old Testament need not to be adhered to. All the spiritual instruction that a Christian needs is found in the New Testament.
I agree that many Christians refer back to the Old Testament as if the Law was still applicable - but this is because human nature is often one that picks on the weak or the different and is not, in fact, a trait of JC himself or his teachings .
Young Muslims getting it drilled in their heads that if they can correct the perception of the West then Islam will get better. The Drill goes like this: "Somehow If the West sees islam as the religion of Peace, then Islam will improve, then islam's problems will be solved".
The problem is not with the Western perception. I repeat: The problems of fear & violence & misogyny in Islam is NOT a Western Perception. The problem in Islam is within Islam.
Make campaigns asking islamic leaders: "Why Islam is Not Peace". Bring them forward and shame them in front of young educated muslims. Let them know that their comfy living will end if they do not get their act together.
As it stands, a hateful jihadi imam (which is the average imam by the way) will spew hate and fear and misogyny in his mosque, then will see his flock going and 'educating' the West instead of kicking his ass. Why do you think he will stop? He is doing what he was always doing and now "Islam is Peace" so he will continue doing what he does.
If you are shocked to see me call the "Average Imam" a hateful Jihadi, you have to realize that, the schools (Madrassas) that produce imams, actively weed out the soft guys. Only some of the old imams still alive might be tolerant since they graduated before Wahabism took over the Imam Schools.But ALL the new imams, every single new Imam had graduated from a school funded with hate and jihad wahabi money.
Only few imams were able to hang on to their humanity against this negative jihadi indoctrination and FOOL the system, so they can graduate even though they are not hateful jihadis.
So as you can see, the problem is not with the Western perception. And islam is hijacked by Wahabism. Will it survive the hijack, maybe? Does it deserve to survive? I am not god & I do not control evolution & neither do you. No one automatically Deserves to survive an evolution. Only if they develop certain features fast enough can they adapt and survive.
So let islam develop the features it needs. Let islam develop the One feature it lacks the most, self-criticism. Islamic teachings are very resistant to criticism & critics. Like any cult, the biggest crime in islam is leaving the cult and the Second biggest crime is criticizing. Murder and Adultery come Third. How can a muslim who believes his book is the perfect text from god, accepts to pick and choose from his book?
I mean this is what we expect from muslims right? to pick & choose the good stuff and leave the bad stuff. I mean some stuff is just bad and no interpretation can save it, right? So to get a muslim to get to that stage, the muslim needs to develop the skill of self-criticism.
Why do we expect that the muslim will suddenly develop a skill that he did not develop for 1400yrs? Don't we have to teach him? Don't we have to pressure him? Isn't pressure the main driver for evolving features? What if the muslim fails to evolve the skill of self-criticism? Do you think islam will survive? Do we still care to have islam in a multi-plural society?
Regards,
Baal
Of course it is not an accident. I have almost 4000 posts on FFI. If Sanitize posted there, then probably he expected advice of some sort or was trying to engage someone from there experienced about islam and muslims.
I saw what people wrote on this thread and it seemed like people in this forum know how to hold a conversation so I joined in.
Fair enough.
As you will know I have very little time for religion. But I find the singleing out of a particular faith and the tarring of everyone with the same brush, often for rather sinister reasons and directed by the British naziboys and their circle, not only disgusting but also a dangerous and worrying situation. You could be forgiven for thinking we're in Germany circa 1938 at the moment.
I am not a practicing Christian at all BUT I do find the persona of JC himself to be a very good example of how I would like to be as a human being.
The way that the Qu'ran is written is nothing like Biblical scripture ... it is verbose, rambling and you need the Hadith (written later by Muhammed's followers) to try and put any semblance of understanding to it. The worrying thing is that the surahs get more and more intolerant and violent as you progress through from start to finish - an indication that whereas at the start, Muhammed was still trying to win people over to his views and is therefore more accomodating of non-Muslims, by the end he had built up his power and is able to decree surahs that suit his whims and establish his power base - usually by violent means.
As per koran 4:3, Four wives or what your right hand possesses. As per the rules of law and logic that means Up to Four wives simulaneously with what your right hand possesses. Couple of Thousands during his life. The first large-scale massacres (more then a Thousand per massacre) happened during the couple years after his death when Abu Bakr became the first Kalipha. Abu Bakr went after Muslims who refused to pay Zakat directly to him. He called them apostates and killed 70 Thousands and lost 700 brave jihadi. You can assume Allah was with Abu bakr when he only lost 700 soldiers versus 70000 soldiers. Or you can read history and realize that the bulk of the 70000 victim were civilians being made an example of.
Islamic Tidbits: Abu Bakr used to be Muhammad's Blood-brother and also the Father of Aisha, Muhammad's child bride. To be able to marry Aisha, Muhammad canceled the custom of blood-brothers. Aisha was 6 when Muhammad was 50 and then as per the marriage contract, he consumated the marriage when she turned 9 and he turned 53.
As per the movie 'Hot Fuzz': It is for the greater good. I am concerned with Thousands of children losing their childhood. Female Genital Mutilations encouraged through islamic patriarchal institutions. Women getting beat up and the husbands hiding behind islamic laws. Bombs going off taking hundreds of civilian lives every week. Majority of mosques around the world spewing hate and fear against infidels. Apostates getting kileed and tortured DAILY. People denied the right to pick their personal belief system. People getting belief systems enforced on their children. And an absolute and complete lack of self-criticism even among the worst offenders. So the feelings of a muslim poster will have to take the backseat a little on this one. Just like my secular Catholic beliefs often take the backseat, often under my own personal self-criticism.
After receiving the confirmation. Muslims will then move to take their Instruction from the koran. And a fine Instruction it is. The problem Aladdin is that, the average muslim DOES take the word of the koran literatlly as the word of god. Each word of it.
And to add to the previous post. The vast majority of Christians believe the new testament are NOT written by God and the old testament is NOT written by god. Even the the new and old testaments tell you they are not written by god.
The vast majority of muslims DO believe the koran is written by god and the koran itself tells you it is written by god.
Comparing how Christian do not take the bible literally and muslims do not take the koran literally is a Hasty Generalization.
Again, the moderate majority of Muslims reject the more unpleasant parts of the Koran just as much as the moderate majority of Christians reject the more unpleasant parts of the Bible.
That is what everybody should keep in mind, rather concentrating on what was actually written by whom or the differences between the Bible and the Koran. I can't help but think some people are trying to go out of the way in their efforts to demonise one religion and their faithful as a whole when they're no worse than the other religions.
OhmyGod how many times do you have to be told? Muslims believe that the Qur'an is the literal word of God revealed to Muhammad by the Angel Gabriel. They are not allowed to reject any of it, not a single letter or word.
Of course, many people born into Islam do, in fact, live their lives by ignoring the unpleasant bits and just praying, fasting etc. They are simply cultural muslims. According to Islamic law they would be bad muslims, or hypocrites.
My issue was that in discussing a faith broadly and openly that's something that is focused on to distance people from the general issues around Islam and paint it as a barbaric religion.
Given Cheeta's comments already that he sees some kind of 'war' against Islam being required I wasn't about to let him turn a discussion of Islam into mudslinging.
Well it's good that you are the ultimate arbitrer of who is a muslim who is just a pretender. Are you Allah himself per chance?
There is no call for a 'war' against Islam. I have called for it to be put under the same type of scrutiny that Christianity has had to get used to. And I'm afraid that means Muhammad, and the example he set to his followers, has to be part of the debate.
Funny how the same people on this thread who are horrified by that thought, don't hesitate to criticise the Bible and biblical figures. Whats good for the goose should be good for the gander.
And btw I am not a he.
You don't need to be Allah himself to read and understand the Qur'an, and the rules laid down in it.
Firstly you suggested that we had only two options a war with Islam or a higher level of criticism of Islam. Given you and others have gone out of your way to suggest that Islam isn't properly criticised and won't be by its follows that suggests to me you are suggesting a need for a war.
Secondly, the point is that criticism of christianity is based on a theological groundwork and understanding of modern societies understanding and interpretation of Christian teaching, practice and the Bible.
By continually dismissing ever Muslim that doesn't exactly follow your view of the Koran you are undermining any possible level playing field with Christian criticism. You've outright decided the answer before you start - it doesn't sound like you for one second want real criticism - it sounds in the majority of things you've posted that you simply want to propose your interpretation of Islam as the one and only true view of Islam - then use it to attack Islam.
Your comments about Islam are far away from the criticisms of christianity found here - and I would imagine are relatively unchallenged (unlike far tamer criticisms of christianity) simply because of lack of familiarity with Islam, or interest frankly, amongst the majority of posters here.
But no matter. They're no real Muslims apparently. Somebody should tell them and save them the trouble they go through with fasting and whatnot.
That's exactly what I am suggesting. Your convoluted attempt to read between the lines to find war is a red herring.
As for your allegation that I propose my view to be the one and only true view of Islam - show me one major school of Islamic thought which denies that the Qur'an is the literal word of God revealed to Muhammad. Point me to one muslim scholar who says a muslim can ignore parts of the Qur'an and still be a muslim.
hmm
But Abraham was also testing God. A God who would make him sacrifice his son wasn't worth following.
And I wonder what Noah and his family thought of their Lord murdering millions of innocent children (even if their parents were all wicked and deserving of drowning) during the Flood.