Myths about Islam [Archive] - Whistle Stopper Political Forums

Michele

06-07-2004, 04:01 PM

That is not a myth, it is true. Christianity and judaism are also quite sexist by the way.

That one is also not a myth.

can you please provide us reading material on both of those alleged myths you site... the whole issue is that like everything else that has to do with the ME... it is clear there is much discourse on this subject that are in battle with each other. Obviously the subjugation of women is evident in all the three religions. If this was not true there would not have been any feminist movement anywhere in the world.

What I am after is all the discourse on these subjects. Personally, I am not pushing forth anything definitive, as even if you read Muslim theologians or scholars with regard to Qur'aan and its intepretation during the life of Mohammed and after his death... it becomes plainly obvious that there is disparity within the Muslim community itself, which seems in part to be specific to the rebellion of the Islamists against their own orthodoxy wherein verse has been manipulated as well as interpretation.

There also seems to be the issue of vilification against Islam by Judeo christainity and vica versa with regard to whose word is the least corrupt. As far as Islam being intolerate toward other religions it seems dependent upon what time period and geographic local one is talking about wherein Islam is both intolerant and tolerant. There is the matter of the laws as they apply to the dhimmis(?). As I have read discourse which highlights both tolerance and intolerance toward both non-Muslims and Muslims as well.

Of course you don't have to provide us anymore than you have already, I am just saying that just your comment only is not altogether definitive and requires further discourse. I would prefer Muslim's themselves would join this debate... as I am at times skeptical of the interpretations of Judeo Christian scholars and feel there is enough discourse within the Muslim community, including that provided by Muslim Feminists BTW that at the very least the subject matter requires more than just a cursory glance.

All in all from an intellectual standpoint it is fascinating and disturbing all in the same breathe. My point is you can not just come in here and make a post without including some discourse on the matter.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 04:36 PM

Is Islam A Peaceful Religion? What the Koran and the Hadiths Say...

Those who resist Allah and his messenger will be humbled to dust. (Koran 58:5)

Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush. (Koran 9:5)

I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips of them. (Koran 8:12)

The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn for ever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures. Koran (98:1-8)

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement,
(Koran 5:33)

A Muslim may not be killed if he kills a non-Muslim (Al Bukhari Vol 9:50)

Fight against those who believe not in Allah, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth [Islam], until they are subdued. (Surat At-Taubah 9:29)

Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.
Sahih Al-Bukhari (9:57)

Idolatry is more grievous than bloodshed... fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme" (Sura 2:91-93).

The Prophet said: "fighting is (art of deceit)." (Ibn-E-Majah, Vol. 2, p.
182)

Fight against those who believe not in Allah, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth [Islam], until they are subdued.
Surat At-Taubah 9:29

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

Allah is an enemy to unbelievers. (Koran 2: 98)

Allah plots against unbelievers. (The Morning Star: 15)

"Acting as Allah's soldier for one night in a battlefield is superior to saying prayers at home for 2,000 years." (Ibn-E-Majah, Vol. 2, p. 166)

Allah has cursed them (the Jews) on account of their unbelief; so little it is that they believe. (Koran 2:88)

Mohammed said, “The last hour will not come before the Muslims fight the Jews, and the Muslims kill them.” (Mishkat Al Masabih Sh.M. Ashraf pp.147, 721, 810-11, 1130)

Michele

06-07-2004, 04:52 PM

PLEASE don't do that Madrigallian. <mod edit>... we do not want Qur'aanic verses out of context... what article did you pull the quotes out of? I just placed discourse regarding that question myself. It is not helpful to just plop down verse out of context. It is deceptive (whether accidental or on purpose).

The full article entitled, DOES ISLAM PROMOTE PEACE? replete with qur'aan verse interpreted from a christian perspective can be found here!

http://www.whistlestopper.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12540

The site i started the above thread with is a christian site with seemingly compassionate discourse with regard to Islam. It appears to wish to enlighten Muslims to embrace the word of God through Christianity.

marv

06-07-2004, 05:02 PM

Madrigallian, never argue with religious fanatics, their minds are already made up.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 05:05 PM

If you would like to supply some context in order to attempt and refute the quoted verses please feel free. I would personally be rather interested in hearing your views as to in what context any of the above quotes should be considered tolerant or peaceful. The only deception I see is in your list of alleged myths.

You made the assertion Michele, I have simply quoted the Koran regarding your assertions of peacful tolerance. If you do not like the quotes of feel they were taken out of context (although their meanings seem quite clear to me) then as this was based on your original assertions it would be your responsibility to provide the context in which you believe these quotes are justified and in line with your stated assertions.

Good luck.

================================================== =====

Islam's Shame
Lifting the Veil of Tears
by Ibn Warraq

Islam is deeply anti-woman. Islam is the fundamental cause of the repression of Muslim women and remains the major obstacle to the evolution of their position.[1] Islam has always considered women as creatures inferior in every way: physically, intellectually, and morally. This negative vision is divinely sanctioned in the Koran, corroborated by the hadiths, and perpetuated by the commentaries of the theologians, the custodians of Muslim dogma and ignorance.

Far better for these intellectuals to abandon the religious argument, to reject these sacred texts, and have recourse to reason alone. They should turn instead to human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted on December 10, 1948, by the General Assembly of the United Nations in Paris and ratified by most Muslim countries) at no point has recourse to a religious argument. These rights are based on natural rights, which any adult human being capable of choice has. They are rights that human beings have simply because they are human beings. Human reason or rationality is the ultimate arbiter of rights - human rights, the rights of women.

Unfortunately, in practice, in Muslim countries one cannot simply leave the theologians with their narrow, bigoted world view to themselves. One cannot ignore the ulama, those learned doctors of Muslim law who by their fatwas or decisions in questions touching private or public matters of importance regulate the life of the Muslim community. They still exercise considerable powers of approving or forbidding certain actions. Why the continuing influence of the mullas?

The Koran remains for all Muslims, not just "fundamentalists," the uncreated word of God Himself. It is valid for all times and places; its ideas are absolutely true and beyond all criticism. To question it is to question the very word of God, and hence blasphemous. A Muslim's duty is to believe it and obey its divine commands.

Several other factors contribute to the continuing influence of the ulama. Any religion that requires total obedience without thought is not likely to produce people capable of critical thought, people capable of free and independent thought. Such a situation is favorable to the development of a powerful "clergy" and is clearly responsible for the intellectual, cultural, and economic stagnation of several centuries. Illiteracy remains high in Muslim countries. Historically, as there never was any separation of state and religion, any criticism of one was seen as a criticism of the other. Inevitably, when many Muslim countries won independence after the Second World War, Islam was unfortunately linked with nationalism, which meant that any criticism of Islam was seen as a betrayal of the newly independent country - an unpatriotic act, an encouragement to colonialism and imperialism. No Muslim country has developed a stable democracy; Muslims are being subjected to every kind of repression possible. Under these conditions healthy criticism of society is not possible, because critical thought and liberty go together.

The above factors explain why Islam in general and the position of women in particular are never criticized, discussed, or subjected to deep scientific or skeptical analysis. All innovations are discouraged in Islam - every problem is seen as a religious problem rather than a social or economic one.

<snip>

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/warraq_17_4.html

Michele

06-07-2004, 05:09 PM

Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush. (Koran 9:5)

Take this quote it comes from Chapter 9 of the Qur'an. The chapter is: AL-TAWBA (REPENTANCE, DISPENSATION).

HERE IS THE HISTORIC BACKGROUND ON THE ABOVE CHAPTER:

Historical Background

Now let us consider the historical background of the Surah. The series of events that have been discussed in this Surah took place after the Peace Treaty of Hudaibiyah. By that time, one-third of Arabia had come under the sway of Islam which had established itself as a powerful, well organized and civilized Islamic State. This Treaty afforded further opportunities to Islam to spread its influence in the comparatively peaceful atmosphere created by it. After this Treaty, two events took place, which led to very important results:

Conquest of Arabia

The first was the Conquest of Arabia. The Holy Prophet was able to send missions among different clans for the propagation of Islam. The result was that during the short period of two years, it became such a great power that it made the old order of ignorance' feel helpless before it. So much so that the zealous elements from among the Quraish were so exasperated that they broke the Treaty in order to encounter Islam in a decisive combat. But the Holy Prophet took prompt action after the breach so as not to allow them any opportunity to gather enough force for this. He made a sudden invasion on Makkah in the month of Ramadan in A. H. 8 and conquered it. Though this conquest broke the backbone of the order of ignorance, it made still another attack on Islam in the battle-field of Hunain, which proved to be its death-knell. The clans of Hawazin Thaqif, Naur, Jushm and others gathered their entire forces in the battle field in order to crush the reformative Revolution, but they utterly failed in their evil designs. The defeat of 'ignorance' at Hunain paved the way for making the whole of Arabia the 'Abode of Islam' (Dar-ul-Islam). The result was that hardly a year had Passed after the Battle of Hunain, when the major portion of Arabia came within the fold of Islam and only a few upholders of the old order remained scattered over some corners of the country.

SNIP

Campaign to Tabuk

The Campaign to Tabuk was the result of conflict with the Roman Empire, that had started even before the conquest of Makkah. One of the missions sent after the Treaty of Hudaibiyah to different parts of Arabia visited the clans which lived in the northern areas adjacent to Syria. The majority of these people were Christians, who were under the influence of the Roman Empire. Contrary to all the principles of the commonly accepted international law, they killed fifteen members of the delegation near a place known as Zat-u-Talah (or Zat-i-Itlah). Only Ka'ab bin Umair Ghifari, the head of the delegation, succeeded in escaping and reporting the sad incident. Besides this, Shurahbll bin Amr, the Christian governor of Busra, who was directly under the Roman Caesar, had also put to death Haritli bin Umair, the ambassador of the Holy Prophet, who had been sent to him on a similar minion.

These events convinced the Holy Prophet that a strong action should be taken in order to make the territory adjacent to the Roman Empire safe and secure for the Muslims.

MORE...

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau9.html

here are all the verses OF THIS SAME CHAPTER IN SEQUENCE. Apparently this chapter was written with regard to actions that could be taken during a time of conquests over the Roman Empire.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/009.qmt.html

ukangel

06-07-2004, 05:11 PM

Dr. Jamal Badawi has written an article called The Status of Women in Islam. When someone teaches such a topic it is important that all the relevant material from the Qur'an and Hadith be examined. If all of the material is not examined then one could form an unbalanced understanding of the topic.

BEATING

And those (wives) you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them. (Qur'an 4:34, Arberry)

Some translations of the Qur'an have tried to suggest that the word of "beat" means to hit softly. However the same Arabic word is used in 8:12 which reads:

When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying: ) I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger. (Qur'an 8:12, Pickthall)

Here are some hadiths about wife beating.

Umar reported the Prophet as saying, "A man will not be asked about why he beat his wife." (Mishkat Al-Masabih, p. 693: Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah)

... Umar then came forward, and when he had asked and had been granted permission he found the Prophet sitting sad and silent with his wives around him. He told that he decided to say something which would make the Prophet laugh, so he said, "Messenger of God, I wish you had seen the daughter of Kharija when she asked me for extra money and I got up and slapped her on the neck." God's messenger laughed and said, "They are around me as you see asking for extra money." Abu Bakr then got up, went to A'isha and slapped her on the neck, and Umar did the same to Hafsa ... (Mishkat Al-Masabih, p. 690: Muslim)

Iyas b. Abdullah reported God's messenger as saying, "Do not beat God's handmaidens" but when Umar came to God's messenger and said, "The women have become emboldened towards their husbands", he gave licence to beat them. Then many women went round God's messenger's family complaining of their husbands. Those are not the best among you. (Mishkat Al-Masabih, p. 692: Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, and Darimi)

Muhammad beat his wives.

... He (Muhammad b. Qais) then reported that it was 'A'isha who had narrated this: Should I not narrate to you about myself and about the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi'. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O 'A'isha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly? ... (Sahih Muslim, book 4, hadith 2127)
SATISFYING THE HUSBAND'S SEXUAL DESIRES

The Qur'an, speaking figuratively about sex, says of women:
Women are your fields: go, then, into your fields whence you please. (Qur'an 2:223, Dawood)
Muhammad gave strong warnings to women who would not accommodate their husbands/masters desire.

Talq b. `Ali reported God's messenger as saying, "When a man calls his wife to satisfy his desire she must go to him even if she is occupied at the oven." (Mishkat Al-Masabih, p. 691: Tirmidhi)

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet (p.) said, "if a man invites his wive to sleep with him an she refuses to come to him, then angels send their curses on her till morning." (Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 7, hadith 121, p. 93)

VIRGIN WOMEN ARE A REWARD IN HEAVEN

Lo! those who kept their duty will be in a place secure amid gardens and water-springs, attired in silk and silk embroidery, facing one another. Even so (it will be). And we shall wed them unto fair ones with wide, lovely eyes. (Qur'an 44:51-54, Pickthall)

Surely for the godfearing awaits a place of security, gardens and vineyards and maidens with swelling breasts, like of age, and a cup overflowing. (Qur'an 78:31-33, Arberry)

Perfectly We formed them, perfect, and We made them spotless virgins, chastely amorous, like of age for the Companions of the Right. (Qur'an 56:34-35, Arberry)

Mu`adh reported God's messenger as saying that no woman annoys her husband in this world without his wife among the large-eyed maidens saying, "You must not annoy him. God curse you! He is only a passing guest with you and is about to leave you to come to us." (Mishkat Al-Masabih, p. 691: Tirmidh and Ibn Majah)

MENTAL CAPACITY

The Qur'an says that the testimony of a woman is not equal to that of a man. It says that the testimony of two women is required to be equal to the testimony of one man.
Call in two male witnesses from among you, but if two men cannot be found, then one man and two women whom you judge fit to act as witnesses. (Qur'an 2:282, Dawood)
Why is it that the testimony of a woman is only worth half that of a man? Muhammad explains in the following hadith.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Green/womenstatus.htm

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 05:18 PM

Take this quote it comes from Chapter 9 of the Qur'an. The chapter is: AL-TAWBA (REPENTANCE, DISPENSATION).

HERE IS THE HISTORIC BACKGROUND ON THE ABOVE CHAPTER:

Historical Background

Now let us consider the historical background of the Surah. The series of events that have been discussed in this Surah took place after the Peace Treaty of Hudaibiyah. By that time, one-third of Arabia had come under the sway of Islam which had established itself as a powerful, well organized and civilized Islamic State. This Treaty afforded further opportunities to Islam to spread its influence in the comparatively peaceful atmosphere created by it. After this Treaty, two events took place, which led to very important results:

Conquest of Arabia

The first was the Conquest of Arabia. The Holy Prophet was able to send missions among different clans for the propagation of Islam. The result was that during the short period of two years, it became such a great power that it made the old order of ignorance' feel helpless before it. So much so that the zealous elements from among the Quraish were so exasperated that they broke the Treaty in order to encounter Islam in a decisive combat. But the Holy Prophet took prompt action after the breach so as not to allow them any opportunity to gather enough force for this. He made a sudden invasion on Makkah in the month of Ramadan in A. H. 8 and conquered it. Though this conquest broke the backbone of the order of ignorance, it made still another attack on Islam in the battle-field of Hunain, which proved to be its death-knell. The clans of Hawazin Thaqif, Naur, Jushm and others gathered their entire forces in the battle field in order to crush the reformative Revolution, but they utterly failed in their evil designs. The defeat of 'ignorance' at Hunain paved the way for making the whole of Arabia the 'Abode of Islam' (Dar-ul-Islam). The result was that hardly a year had Passed after the Battle of Hunain, when the major portion of Arabia came within the fold of Islam and only a few upholders of the old order remained scattered over some corners of the country.

SNIP

Campaign to Tabuk

The Campaign to Tabuk was the result of conflict with the Roman Empire, that had started even before the conquest of Makkah. One of the missions sent after the Treaty of Hudaibiyah to different parts of Arabia visited the clans which lived in the northern areas adjacent to Syria. The majority of these people were Christians, who were under the influence of the Roman Empire. Contrary to all the principles of the commonly accepted international law, they killed fifteen members of the delegation near a place known as Zat-u-Talah (or Zat-i-Itlah). Only Ka'ab bin Umair Ghifari, the head of the delegation, succeeded in escaping and reporting the sad incident. Besides this, Shurahbll bin Amr, the Christian governor of Busra, who was directly under the Roman Caesar, had also put to death Haritli bin Umair, the ambassador of the Holy Prophet, who had been sent to him on a similar minion.

These events convinced the Holy Prophet that a strong action should be taken in order to make the territory adjacent to the Roman Empire safe and secure for the Muslims.

MORE...

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau9.html

here are all the verses OF THIS SAME CHAPTER IN SEQUENCE. Apparently this chapter was written with regard to actions that could be taken during a time of conquests over the Roman Empire.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/009.qmt.html

"The Koran remains for all Muslims, not just "fundamentalists," the uncreated word of God Himself. It is valid for all times and places; its ideas are absolutely true and beyond all criticism. To question it is to question the very word of God, and hence blasphemous. A Muslim's duty is to believe it and obey its divine commands."

Michele

06-07-2004, 05:21 PM

If you would like to supply some context in order to attempt and refute the quoted verses please feel free. I would personally be rather interested in hearing your views as to in what context any of the above quotes should be considered tolerant or peaceful.

================================================== =====

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/warraq_17_4.html

Well I am not sure there was much tolerance or peace during the time in which the chapter of verse takes place. Are you? However within it's context I am not sure I would describe that those versus had much to do with peace but instead for the protecting of the Muslim people during a time of strife with the roman empire as I have already demonstrated.

Of course I myself am attempting to place all in its rightful historic perspective. For it is these verses that it seems the Islamists (ALQ and the like) have pulled from the Koran in order to rally or recruit for their Jihad.

Now I need to fill in the history as to what was the chronology in terms of Arabia and the Roman Empire as well. I suppose under this circumstance on can come away from it concluding Islam is not a religion of Peace. But it does not appear this chapter was written during a time of peace. shall we say the Muslims should have not conquested land from the Roman Empire?

On the other hand it appears you have already made your judgement. A judgment based in I am not sure what frame of reference. As it appears your crusade at this time is prove Islam an evil religion. You can correct me if I am wrong.

I am not up to judging it or proving much of anything about it. As I don't have the appropriate frame of reference to do that. So all I am doing is attempting to provide historic content so the verses are read within that context.

You see I am not willing to call for the destruction of any religion not based upon the random pulling of verse out of context. You can proceed however you wish.

This last bit you contributed: do you know what the bias of the site secularhumanism (I like that name) is from which you pulled the piece? That is also helpful as clearly there is quite the quandary between all three monotheistic religions all wishing to protect the sanctity of their beliefs, all it seems resistant to conversion based upon the indictments of the Authorities of that time, respectively.

All I know for sure is disparity and much bad blood exists between all three of these religions. All have their war calls to kill, pagans, and witches, and those who commit heresy, that is not exclusive to Islam.

Michele

06-07-2004, 05:31 PM

"The Koran remains for all Muslims, not just "fundamentalists," the uncreated word of God Himself. It is valid for all times and places; its ideas are absolutely true and beyond all criticism. To question it is to question the very word of God, and hence blasphemous. A Muslim's duty is to believe it and obey its divine commands."

Oh you are an authority? I hadn't realized. Apparenty you have not read any discourse of the respectible Muslim clerics themselves on the fluidity of how verse should be looked upon.

Of course I would assume as an historic document it is to be believed as true, however as true within the context of that given situation. At times of peace there is no reason to call forth dispensation for war.

I am not sure you are aware of the guidance provided those practicing Islam either. They are to question verse and its application and they are guided by greater commandments and laws than these which clearly solely apply to this given situation.

Please you will have to provide us your creditials as a scholar on Qur'aanic verse as you seem to believe yourself quite informed.

In the meantime I will see if I can find articles from Muslim clerics as to the frame of mind with which Muslims are to come to verse, and their spiritual understanding of the word of God.

You see these verses here that you were kind enough to place for us out of context; I would think while they are to be believed as truly the word of Allah, they do not apply to all situations. I would assume you know the Islamists have very little to do with the orthodoxy of Islam.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 05:48 PM

This last bit you contributed: do you know what the bias of the site secularhumanism (I like that name) is from which you pulled the piece?

Yes as a matter of fact I do. They are a secular non-partisan non-profit organization and study group "biased" against intolerant, oppressive, biggoted and violent religions/ideologies whose principle teachings are based in ignorance and stupidity. Such as Islam for example.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 06:02 PM

Oh you are an authority? I hadn't realized. Apparenty you have not read any discourse of the respectible Muslim clerics themselves on the fluidity of how verse should be looked upon.

Of course I would assume as an historic document it is to be believed as true, however as true within the context of that given situation. At times of peace there is no reason to call forth dispensation for war.

I am not sure you are aware of the guidance provided those practicing Islam either. They are to question verse and its application and they are guided by greater commandments and laws than these which clearly solely apply to this given situation.

Please you will have to provide us your creditials as a scholar on Qur'aanic verse as you seem to believe yourself quite informed.

In the meantime I will see if I can find articles from Muslim clerics as to the frame of mind with which Muslims are to come to verse, and their spiritual understanding of the word of God.

You see these verses here that you were kind enough to place for us out of context; I would think while they are to be believed as truly the word of Allah, they do not apply to all situations. I would assume you know the Islamists have very little to do with the orthodoxy of Islam.

Maybe you missed the quotes I placed around that paragraph denoting that I was not the writer of it. I noted the author the first time quite clearly above.

Islam's Shame
Lifting the Veil of Tears
by Ibn Warraq

~or~

Why I Am Not a Muslim
by Ibn Warraq

You have only provided the "historical" context of one quote provided above from the Koran, which is not at all the same thing as providing any context as to how that quote is presented within the Koran as a teaching of Islamic principles today.

There is a difference.

Captain America

06-07-2004, 06:03 PM

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 06:11 PM

All I know for sure is disparity and much bad blood exists between all three of these religions. All have their war calls to kill, pagans, and witches, and those who commit heresy, that is not exclusive to Islam.

This thread is about Islam Michele. You should know that, you started it by alleging that most of the factual and terrible truths regarding Islam are instead myths.

So do not act surprised that others have a differing opinion regarding your alleged myths and provide you with very evident examples of the erroneous nature of your assertions.

::Major_Baker::

06-07-2004, 06:17 PM

I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips of them. (Koran 8:12)

With all due respect, I guess I just don't see how THIS can be taken out of context. Any 'context' would seem irrelevant in that this is simply a hateful statement.
It speaks of terrorizing those who believe differently than you, and physically assaulting them because of it.

It doesn't say 'conquerors, aggressors, etc. It says 'unbelievers'
Tolerance? Not evident.

Captain America

06-07-2004, 06:21 PM

This thread is about Islam Michele. You should know that, you started it by alleging that most of the factual and terrible truths regarding Islam are instead myths.

Muslims live in a fantasy world of Mohammad, 70 virgins, Allah, etc.... (Much like the Jesus freaks do, only different.) Anyways, why not believe facts are myths? They believe myths are facts! What's the difference?

Their up is our down. Their left is our right. Their right is our wrong. I am not surprised by Michelle's initial post in the least.

We choose to live in a country of lush greenery and fertile land. They (Middle Easterners) choose a dry desert, famine, plague, and bloody terror.

We are as different as day and night. Common sense dictates who is right.

Michele

06-07-2004, 07:34 PM

screw islam, and Judaism, and christain and all three of swords and the distortions they have foisted upon one another. Very nice! what a provocative sentiment. I am glad it is not mine.

You all can believe what you wish about why the Jihadists are up in arms without a full perspective on the subject. There are a minority of people here, like myself that do wish to understand all the hatred between all the three religions maligning one another. In other words it is clear to me that vilification of Islam is allow.

You will have to excuse me if I don't get on the bandwagon in the same anglocentric way everyone else.... like Christainity has such a bright and stellar record when it comes to killing non believers of every strip other than there own.

Beating women is definitely not a good thing in any case and but I don't see it is any less a problem in other part of the "civilized" including our America either. You don't seem to think vilifying a whole other people and their religions is a big deal. I do. And the source of this violence is multifactorial, as if the rest of the world has such a clean record on the killing of innocence.

Just don't place the verses out of context and believe you are informing this forum.

Michele

06-07-2004, 07:39 PM

This thread is about Islam Michele. You should know that, you started it by alleging that most of the factual and terrible truths regarding Islam are instead myths.

So do not act surprised that others have a differing opinion regarding your alleged myths and provide you with very evident examples of the erroneous nature of your assertions.

I did not allege it was a myth. Madrigallian don't twist this up. If you read all the other threads I opened on Islam I am not alleging anything but I do not believe Islam is the sole cause of this crisis.

I do not yet know what is a myth or what is not. All I know is I am also interested in the voice of Muslims speaking out on behalf of or in criticism of their own religion and pulling verses haphazardly out of the Qur'aan, is not helpful. I did not open the thread to profess definitively that all those listed as myths were myths. I opened a variety of threads on the subject to cull discourse from all sides, NOT JUST THE VERSES OUT OF CONTEXT. We played that game yesterday and the poster who only did pull verse out of context, professing Islam was an evil religion with no links and no sources, and no discouse whatsoever,was banned, .

So that is all I ask DON'T PULL THE VERSES OUT OF CONTEXT AND BELIEVE YOU HAVED THE UTIMATE AND MOST DEFINITIVE VIEW ON THE SUBJECT. While perhaps you believe yourself to be an authority. I am not convinced you are, regardless of what your opinions on the subject happen to be. Nor am I convinced the discourse on answering islam is either. If that is alright with you.

surprised that vilifying Islam is a patriotic passtime?. No, Madrigallian that hardly surprises me.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 07:44 PM

What a load of bull**** Michele.

A spade is a spade is a spade. I am not a Christian. I am not a Jew. I am not Islamic. But I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that Islam promotes biggotry, intolerance, murder and dishonesty as admirable traits to aspire to.

Read tyhe damn thing yourself.

That is not a generalization or taken out of context.

It's a fact. It is well documented in it's own texts and you know that to be a fact. You knew it when you were wholey incapable of responding to Logic85 and his thread. (which I just read just now) Btw, why was he banned again? Because I read nothing in that thread that was imo grounds for even a warning.

And I will villify anything that earns the villification. Including Christianity.

Michele

06-07-2004, 07:45 PM

What a load of bull**** Michele.

A spade is a spade is a spade. I am not a Christian. I am not a Jew. I am not Islamic. But I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that Islam promotes biggotry, intolerance, murder and dishonesty as admirable traits to aspire to.

Read tyhe damn thing yourself.

That is not a generalization or taken out of context.

It's a fact. It is well documented in it's own texts and you know that to be a fact. You knew it when you were wholey incapable of responding to Logic85 and his thread. (which I just read just now) Btw, why was he banned again? Because I read nothing in that thread that was imo grounds for even a warning.

oh my what a chip you got there on that shoulder of yours. Please don't speak for me madrigallian.

What is a fact? That Islam is the evil religion?

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 07:47 PM

Most organized religions are Michele, of which yes Islam takes top prize in today's world.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 07:50 PM

I did not allege it was a myth. Madrigallian don't twist this up. If you read all the other threads I opened on Islam I am not alleging anything but I do not believe Islam is the sole cause of this crisis.

Really? Thats odd... who wrote this then?

Myth: Islam Tolerates the Killing of Innocents
Myth: In Islam, Women are Inferior to Men
Myth: Islam Degrades Women
Myth: Muslims Worship Muhammad
Myth: Muhammad Wrote The Qur'an
Myth: Muslims Reject or Hate Jesus
Myth: Islam is Intolerant of Other Religions
Myth: Islam was Spread by the Sword
Myth: Islam is a Racist, Afro-Centric Cult
Myth: Islam is a Religion only for Arabs
Myth: In Islam, Denial of Human Rights is Acceptable
Myth: Islam is Fatalistic
Myth: Islam Produces a Lazy, Uneducated Society

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 07:53 PM

What is a fact? That Islam is the evil religion?

Have I in any way been unclear Michele?

Hydrok

06-07-2004, 07:54 PM

I think the beating is equivlent to a spanking... Are you an evil parent if you spank your kid...

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 07:56 PM

Are you equating a grown woman with a child?

Michele

06-07-2004, 08:08 PM

Have I in any way been unclear Michele?

well you appear to be singling islam out as the only religion where intolerance, bigotry, the subjugation of women etc. is an issue. You seem to be arguing that those maladies are exclusive to Islam. If that is not what you are arguing then I have misunderstood you.

Michele

06-07-2004, 08:13 PM

Are you equating a grown woman with a child?

Have you read any of the Muslim feminist criticism of not necessarily Islam but how the Islamic jurists or even some of the modern day clerics (not the Islamists they are a whole other category) are indeed not living up to the teachings of the prophet which is part of the reason there is this problem with inequality between the sexes?

I have. It seems according to the few feminists I have read. things got better for women during the days of the prophet and during the course of this century things have worsened due to the rise in fundamentalism and what the feminists believe is the misinterpretation of the prophet.

So what has caused this rise in rabid fundamentalists which, in essence, is more a through back to the days before Islam (regardless of the Islamists who are invoking some of the quraanic verses out of context as well).

I placed discourse written by Muslim Feminists in this thread:

http://www.whistlestopper.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11883

you have to wade through the thread to find it, hopefully without jumping to any conclusions on the way.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 08:17 PM

well you appear to be singling islam out as the only religion where intolerance, bigotry, the subjugation of women etc.

Michele... stick with me here for a moment... can you do that for me... just follow the line of cause and effect here...

You wrote a post about Islam in which you asserted that certain factual truths regarding Islam were in your opinion myths perpitrated against Islam instead of actual verifiable truths within the religion that is Islam.

Therefore it follows that any discussion I might have with you, refuting your assertion regarding myths as you described them about Islam would in fact pertain only to the subject matter you chose... that being Islam

::Major_Baker::

06-07-2004, 08:19 PM

You all can believe what you wish about why the Jihadists are up in arms without a full perspective on the subject. There are a minority of people here, like myself that do wish to understand all the hatred between all the three religions maligning one another.

Believe me Michele, I would love to know why the jihadists are up in arms. Of course it has to do with our having an influence in the Middle East (I will not forget to mention the USA's support for Israel as an exacerbating factor, if not the basis for much of this hatred)., namely the Arabian peninsula, but this aspect seems to be projected into a religious context by many. Notice it is not "the Americans" are bothering us-- unwelcome in this area, it is the "infidels."
That to me speaks of intolerance, stemming from a relgious belief. Now I know of Christianity (not very well, I am not Christian) and its intolerance as well. We all know the great pain and death that Christianity has caused as well. But I do not ever try to portray it as a tolerant religion. Nearly all religions imply a certain level of exclusion.. But for you to say that Islam is inherantly tolerant of all religions, and free of violent undertones seems incorrect in my eyes....

I am not villifying Islam, as I know that there are many great Muslims. But your thread on "myths of Islam" was confusing and unfounded in my opinion. I would never issue a similar statement regarding Christianity.

like Christainity has such a bright and stellar record when it comes to killing non believers of every strip other than there own.

I am not denying this statement, as you attempted to do regarding Islam in your previous thread.

Just don't place the verses out of context and believe you are informing this forum.

I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips of them. (Koran 8:12)

I am sorry, I just don't see a wide range of context available for this statement. The same can most likely be said for statements in other faiths.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 08:20 PM

Have you read any of the Muslim feminist criticism of not necessarily Islam but how the Islamic jurists or even some of the modern day clerics (not the Islamists they are a whole other category) are indeed not living up to the teachings of the prophet which is part of the reason there is this problem with inequality between the sexes?

Did you read nothing Ukangel posted? Or Logic85?

Or here's a thought... any of the Koran which quite clearly IS Islamic?

Michele

06-07-2004, 08:21 PM

Really? Thats odd... who wrote this then?

I didn't write those words. I cut and paste those statements of what is myth from the site I opened the thread with in the hopes of having an intelligent discussion as to what is myth and what isn't by the exchange of discourse on the subject from all sides, including what Muslim scholars and theologians have to say on the matter themselves. You have once again jumped to conclusions regarding my intent.

if you hit the link in the lead post you will see I just copied it from the page from what is an islamic site... I don't know about you... but since I don't know a great deal about the orthodox practice of Islam I tend to like to hear from those that are practicing it and those Muslims that are authorties on the qur'an, as well as how they guide its practice.

Not the Islamists. Coming to Islam via the Islamists is like coming to Christainity via the Aryan Nation. Or even the Dispensationalists.

And btw since I embarked up this which was very recently like over the last two days, because I am reading what Muslims have to say on the matter. I have learned a great deal and not only about Islam but about the adversity between all three monotheisitic religions. As well as now the history from that time these versus were transcribed.

Particularly since placing these randomly pulled verses within the context of the books they are pulled from and reading the introductions on each book.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 08:25 PM

So you are a mouthpiece for misinformation that you just took from an Islamic sight? Oh, no you just wanted to debate the issue. I see. Well, here we are, debating.

And we have been having an intelligent conversation. It's the intelligence of your original premise which is in question.

Michele

06-07-2004, 08:26 PM

Did you read nothing Ukangel posted? Or Logic85?

Or here's a thought... any of the Koran which quite clearly IS Islamic?

Of course I have one could not get around reading the quotes Logic85 pulled and I had already been reading from that site the Ukangel pulled the article she placed in this thread as well. Did you not see I pulled up the whole book on one of the quotes you placed and skimmed through it and its introduction. What is your point?

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 08:29 PM

Michele

06-07-2004, 08:30 PM

So you are a mouthpiece for misinformation that you just took from an Islamic sight?

am I?

Oh, no you just wanted to debate the issue. I see. Well, here we are, debating.

do you mean you didn't want to debate the issue?

And we have been having an intelligent conversation. It's the intelligence of your original premise which is in question.

no actually you and I have NOT been having a intelligent conversation. It seems to me you do not wish to. It seems to me you feel yourself an authority on the topic and that evil and bigotry and intolerace is exclusive to Islam and that is the end of the discussion.

Is repression evident, most certainly, however there are a wealth of reasons why that is. Quite frankly I am not sure what your point is!

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 08:32 PM

My point Michele is that you claim Islam is different than what Islamists are making it out to be, which is entirely devoid of reason when one actually reads the scriptures that Islam teaches.

Islam isnt evil but misunderstood. And yet when you read Islamic scripture it says exactly what you are saying true Islam "isnt" about. Clearly and repeatedly.

Michele

06-07-2004, 08:38 PM

I'm sorry Michele, I am having a hard time understanding you, let me see if I can clarify...

If I lived in Palestine as a Palestinian and I said "Jews are evil and should be killed" does me being a Palastinian make me any less an ignorant biggot?

Because you seem to be claiming that "context" is more important that "message".

No message is important, however, how can you cull what the message really is without reading the verses within the book. Are you not aware of all the other messages that are written with all the books of the Qur'aan. Also it is important to know who is disseminating what messages.

The message disseminated from the radical islamists is vial as would the same message be when the head of the Aryan Nation incites hatred by relying on christian verse out of context.

All the verses are applicable to situations. These do not apply to daily life and the practice of those devout muslims who practice with full knowledge of the context those messages were written at the time they were written.

If you don't know the correct context and you don't know the correct practive of orthodox Islam you can't discuss it or how it is being warped by the Islamists.

you have to read the verses in context to understand what I mean... and also read the history with regard to why mohammed even cited these guidances at all. Which is not to say Islam does not have its extremism but there are many factors which guide the practice. The practice itself has to be understood before one can say Islam is or is not a religion of peace.

What is it YOU are asserting. I am not clear on that. you didn't answer that question.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 08:39 PM

no actually you and I have NOT been having a intelligent conversation.

LOL

Well it hasn't been from a lack of trying on my part.

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 08:45 PM

I am asserting that what you call a Myth is in fact reality... well, not everything on your list, some of it is in fact myth. But I think I (and others) have been abundantly clear on which assertions we disagree with.

And as I stated before, they were your assertions. I have provided you, as have others, with compelling scripture and accounts that refute your claims. The Onus is on you to now back up those assertions in light of our rebuttals.

As yet you have not done so. Instead you have simply argued about me and my motives and my "authority" and so on and so forth... all of which is very amusing but does nothing to further the legitimacy of your erroneous assertions.

USViking

06-07-2004, 08:49 PM

Myth: In Islam, Women are Inferior to Men
Myth: Islam Degrades Women

Is it true or false that Islam requires the
testimony of two women to equal that of
one man in court, and if so, is it not
degrading to women?

Is it true or false that women may not
initiate divorce procedings, but that men
may divorce their wives simply by saylng
"I divorce you" three times, and if so, is
it not degrading to women?

Islamic scripture may do no more than enjoin
women (and men) to dress modestly. But
in practise, is it true or false that virtually
all Islamic societies require women to cloak,
shawl, and/or veil themselves, while imposing
no such requirements on men. Is this not degrading
to women? It will not do to reply by pointing
that Islamic women rarely if ever dissent,
because the answer is the are powerless
in the face of custom, and oppression by males.

Myth: Islam was Spread by the Sword

Islam was spread by the sword all the way from
Spain in the west to India in the east: the prior
political structures were wiped out by war, and
in each case replaced by Islamist overlords.

It is true the conquered populations were allowed
to keep their religions, provided they paid additional
taxes. I do not actually know what measures were
taken against infidel tax evaders- maybe you can
fill me in here, but I would be willing to bet those
apprehended wound up looking close-up at the point
of a sword themselves.

Michele

06-07-2004, 08:49 PM

My point Michele is that you claim Islam is different than what Islamists are making it out to be, which is entirely devoid of reason when one actually reads the scriptures that Islam teaches.

what are you basing that assertion on? For even if you read the Muslim feminists it becomes clear their argument with the Islamic Authorities by virtue of the laws and issues of equality, is the feminists quote verse to point out that inequality only exists because the Islamic authorites are not following or interpreting the applicable verses correctly.

Islam isnt evil but misunderstood. And yet when you read Islamic scripture it says exactly what you are saying true Islam "isnt" about. Clearly and repeatedly.

I am not making assertions about Islam. I thus far am only asserting that I do not feel it is the sole culprit to this problem. the Jihadists aside, I also understand that even amongst practioners there exists misunderstanding of the intent and meaning of the scripture.

Now I do not know what scriptures you have read, or whether or not you have read the in text introductions to each book... but it seems you wish to convince me that Islam is something... and you speak of application and interpretation based on what the views of other theologians? your own literal understanding?

My main point is this. At this time I can't make definite statements about the religion or the ideology. And I would be happy to stand behind destroying the religion completely... as long as we also destroy Judaism and Christianity as well. They all have there hand in this ugliness. For all have derided each other to such a degree that if you read Christain thought on Islam you get one understand if you read Islamic thought on Islam you gt another understand.... they all insist they have the more definitive guidance from god. All have good qualities and all bad the ugliness arises when any of the feel encroached upon by the dictates of the other.

My god in the talmud there is verse suggesting that Jesus Christ is a sexual pervert. Did you know that? And as Logic85 made very clear there are judeochristainity interpretations of qur'an suggesting mohammed is a pedaphil. Why should I take any of the at their word.

In instances all there tell a different version of the history altogether.

Larani

06-07-2004, 08:52 PM

No message is important, however, how can you cull what the message really is without reading the verses within the book. Are you not aware of all the other messages that are written with all the books of the Qur'aan. Also it is important to know who is disseminating what messages.

The message disseminated from the radical islamists is vial as would the same message be when the head of the Aryan Nation incites hatred by relying on christian verse out of context.

Michele would you agree the problem with the Aryan Nations with regard to Christianty is they endorse not only Christianity, but also Hitlers ideals of world domnitation and White Racial Supremecy? This is how many in the Western World View Islam in my opinion because Islam is not just a Religion.
It is a political, spiritual, cultural manifestation all hailed under the Banner of Islam. It is a 3rd Reich with a different flag.

One of the biggest problems westerners have with Muslims is where does you allegiance lie. If your American is your allegiance to Amercia or If Canadian is your allegiance to Canada or if your French is your Allegiance to France? Or does you loyalties really reside in the middle east at Mecca. If a Fatwa is declared against non-muslim lands what side of the fence will these Muslims be on.

::Major_Baker::

06-07-2004, 08:52 PM

Michele!

I am confused. Please put this verse into context for me and describe how this speaks not of intolerance and violence. Am I missing something?
I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips of them. (Koran 8:12)

Madrigalian

06-07-2004, 08:52 PM

I am not making assertions about Islam. I thus far am only asserting that I do not feel it is the sole culprit to this problem.

Bull****.

Want to change the pont of your post now go ahead. But at no point have we been discussing in this thread Islam as a "culprit". What we have been discussing is your assertions about myths and Islamic teachings.

It is pointless arguing anything with you Michele. I do not know why I even bother.

Michele

06-07-2004, 09:06 PM

Is it true or false that Islam requires the
testimony of two women to equal that of
one man in court, and if so, is it not
degrading to women?

Is it true or false that women may not
initiate divorce procedings, but that men
may divorce their wives simply by seaylng
"i divorce you" three times, and if so, is
it not degrading to women?

well I am not sure...of course the extremes do apply but I am not sure what is true across the board in every country. The discourse between Islamic laws and feminists is ongoing and in transition there are women in political and legal positions in Iran and Saudi Arabia, I am not sure which other countries. I would assume Egypt and Jordan because they both are secular governments.

however here is a dissertation on just that wrtten by a Muslim Feminist.

Woman Half-the-Man?

Crisis of Male Epistemology in Islamic Jurisprudence

Dr. Abdulaziz Sachedina
University of Virginia

Islamic sacred law, the Shari`a, has been regarded by Muslims as a perfect, divinely ordained religious-ethical-legal system. The Shari`a relates Muslims to God's purposes by providing comprehensive directives in the two spheres of human activity: those actions that relate humanity to God, and those that relate humans to fellow humans. The former actions are categorized as `ibadat (literally, "acts of honoring God", technically, God-human relationships) and the latter are known as mu`amalat (literally, "transactions", technically, interhuman relationships). Whereas the God-human relations have remained more or less immutable in the Shari`a, the area of interhuman relationships has demanded rethinking and reinterpretation of the normative sources like the Qur'an and the Sunna (Tradition) to deduce new directives under changed social conditions. There are, however, epistemological problems connected with the way normative sources are retrieved and interpreted by Muslim jurists which have hampered the necessary progress towards one particular area in the interhuman relationships, namely, the personal status of Muslim women. The juridical deliberations in the exclusively male-oriented traditional centers of Islamic learning, the madrasa, have disregarded female voices in the emerging discourse connected with women's issues and human rights. The redefinition of the status of a Muslim woman in modern society is one of the major issues that confronts Muslim jurists' claims to be authority on legal-ethical sources of Islam. But such a redefinition, as I argue in the paper, is dependent upon Muslim women's participation in the legal- ethical deliberations concerning matters whose situational aspects can be determined only by women themselves. Without their participation in legal-ethical deliberations, women's rights will always depend on a "representational discourse" conducted by male jurists who, in spite of their good intentions, treats the subject as "absent" and hence, lacking the necessary qualification to determine her rights in a patriarchal society.

more...

http://www.people.virginia.edu/~aas/article/article1.htm

and here is a snatch with regard to how Muslim feminist view how they must go about gaining their rights.

The issue of women in Islam is highly controversial. While it is generally agreed that the rights granted to women in the Qur'an and by the prophet Muhammad were a vast improvement in comparison to the situation of women in Arabia prior to the advent of Islam, after the Prophet's death the condition of women in Islam began to decline and revert back to pre-Islamic norms.

snip

Consequently Muslim women have been developing a distinctly "Islamic" feminism, just as women of color in the West have been developing "womanism" in contrast to feminism, which primarily was shaped by the concerns of upper-class Euro-American women. One example of the differences between Western feminism and Islamic feminism concerns the issue of "veiling." The hijab (often translated as "veil") is the form of scarf or hair covering commonly worn by Muslim women. It has always been seen by the Western feminist as oppressive and as a symbol of a Muslim woman's subservience to men. As a result, it often comes as a surprise to Western feminists that the veil has become increasingly common in the Muslim world and is often worn proudly by college girls as a symbol of an Islamic identity, freeing them symbolically from neo-colonial Western cultural imperialism and domination.

snip

third world women, like women of color in the West, are realizing that while they have certain things in common with the struggle of Euro-American feminists, what is best for Euro-American women is not necessarily going to be best for them.

http://www.arches.uga.edu/~godlas/Islamwomen.html

Islam was spread by the sword all the way from
Spain in the west to India in the east: the prior
political structures were wiped out by war, and
in each case replaced by Islamist overlords.

It is true the conquered populations were allowed
to keep their, religions, provided they paid additional
taxes. I do not actually know what measures were
taken against infidel tax evaders- maybe you can
fill me in here, but I would be willing to bet those
apprehended wound up looking close-up at the point
of a sword themselves.

What is so exclusive to Islam about conquesting with the sword? The Judeo Christains or atheists, or the greeks, the romans, the israelites, they didn't pick up the sword? While I will agree there are horrifically extreme forms of male domination to the point of female mutilation (which is most prevelent in Africa), Islam corners that market as well on that as well?

Why do you suppose the Islamists at present are at war with their own governments? Because of Islam?

Michele

06-07-2004, 09:11 PM

Bull****.

Want to change the pont of your post now go ahead. But at no point have we been discussing in this thread Islam as a "culprit". What we have been discussing is your assertions about myths and Islamic teachings.

It is pointless arguing anything with you Michele. I do not know why I even bother.

Thank god! for you see madrigallian i am not arguing anything with you. It is not my fault you do not seem to understand my intent. I have already explained it, and not only in this thread, but in the other thread I openned on Islam as well. I have changed any of my posts, but to correct typos and such.

But I am curious to know WHAT are YOU discussing in this thread?

Michele

06-07-2004, 09:54 PM

Believe me Michele, I would love to know why the jihadists are up in arms. Of course it has to do with our having an influence in the Middle East (I will not forget to mention the USA's support for Israel as an exacerbating factor, if not the basis for much of this hatred)., namely the Arabian peninsula, but this aspect seems to be projected into a religious context by many. Notice it is not "the Americans" are bothering us-- unwelcome in this area, it is the "infidels."

Yes the jihadists are using verse as well as prophecy within their manifestos.

That to me speaks of intolerance, stemming from a relgious belief.

it does speak of intolerance no doubt, but the religious belief in this cause stems not from the a normal practice of Islam. I am not saying there is no intolerance within the religion but the fostering of intolerance is in the interpretion. And so far what I can gather from my very little reading on the subject is that the practice of Islam regressed backward... those that are invoking the religion in these ways are in the minority, which has now spread itself internationally throughout the world, having escalated over these years because of all the grievances that have been ignored since the mandate era. The Jihadists are not orthodox practioners of the religion or the ideology.

There are similar sentiments of killing infidels and heretics throughout the Old testament, and in the Talmud as well.

Now I know of Christianity (not very well, I am not Christian) and its intolerance as well. We all know the great pain and death that Christianity has caused as well. But I do not ever try to portray it as a tolerant religion. Nearly all religions imply a certain level of exclusion.. But for you to say that Islam is inherantly tolerant of all religions, and free of violent undertones seems incorrect in my eyes....

well within the practice it is proven in history that they have been both tolerant and intolerant. again, there are many secular arabs. as for the violence. That region has hardly been free of violence since sykes picot. And all the violence since till now was all that caused by the people indigenous to the region? I don't think so.

I am not villifying Islam, as I know that there are many great Muslims. But your thread on "myths of Islam" was confusing and unfounded in my opinion. I would never issue a similar statement regarding Christianity.

well that is a good point... and I can understand the confusion... at the same time there are myths evident... for you are right it would be foolish to issue a similar statement regarding christianity... We can see intolerance in bigotry with our own eyes... so I guess from the time I opened the thread till now I have actually read a great deal more... the point I am making is I feel some people make these sweeping statements about the ARab word and Arabs and then yesterday regarding Islam having to be destroyed and in read I came across evidence of smears with regard to verse as well as interpretation...

so I opened a number of threads. I have explained my intent more than once in all of the threads I openned. And have attempted to clarify it now more than once in this thread...

I just will not subject my own curiousity to the broad assertions that posters tend to make on this topic... and it is clearly evident to me that there is misunderstanding between practioners who are gain sustanence from the practice... it seems to me there is a chasm between true practice and how it has applied itself via the patriarchs that impliment the laws based on their own inability to practice by the laws as they were meant, and it is interpretation that is the issue. This is what I have culled from reading the feminists.

even the theocratic regimes seem to be mixing up the laws with the spiritual guidances... I have not figured it out yet. But you will not have me saying off the top of my head Islam is the most evil of all. Though I agree obviously extreme inequity and intolerance exists... but is it political, spiritual, religious..

and another question I have is why did things get better for woman because of the Prophet and then worsen over the course of this century?

I am not denying this statement, as you attempted to do regarding Islam in your previous thread.

It is just a matter of honing in on the specific for me. Certainly you are correct in how you put this. There is no denying woman are beating and there are very backward practices. I am just not sure what the root of that is. For even with Judeo Christain the subjugation of woman was not solely religious either.

I continue to you in the next post MBaker.

Michele

06-07-2004, 09:55 PM

I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips of them. (Koran 8:12)

I am sorry, I just don't see a wide range of context available for this statement. The same can most likely be said for statements in other faiths.

again you have to look at the book itself here it is. All practicing muslims would put that into the context or under the category within which it was written. The jihadists are not doing that. This particular verse was written during a time of conquest... This is from Chapter 8. It seems to me this book can not be looked upon in the same way the Bible is. Larani is correct it is not solely a religion Islam.. and I do not know enough to know how devout peaceful practitioners deal with these books on conquest and war, nor do understand how it was the prophet rose to form the religion itself.

At the same time I don't get that some of those so at the ready to wish Islam destroyed , have a working knowledge either. that is why I wish there were muslim posters that would SPEAK UP. I have my own questions.

AL-ANFAL (SPOILS OF WAR, BOOTY) (here is the exact passage).

008.012
YUSUFALI: Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."

PICKTHAL: When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger.
SHAKIR: When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/008.qmt.html

Name

The Surah takes its name AL-ANFAL (The Bounties) from the first verse.
The Period of Revelation

It was revealed in 2 A. H. after the Battle of Badr, the first battle between Islam and kufr. As it contains a detailed and comprehensive review of the Battle, it appears that most probably it was revealed at one and the same time. But it is also possible that some of the verses concerning the problems arising as a result of this Battle might have been revealed later and incorporated at the proper places to make it a continuous whole. At any rate, in the whole Surah there is nothing that might show that it is a collection of a couple of discourses, that have been patched up together.

Historical Background

Before reviewing the Surah, it is worthwhile to consider the events that led to the Battle of Badr.

During the first decade or so of the Prophethood at Makkah, the Message had proved its firmness, and stability. This was the result of two things. First, the Messenger, who possessed the highest qualities of character, was performing his Mission with wisdom, foresight and magnanimity. He had shown by his conduct that he had made up his mind to carry the movement to a successful end and, therefore, was ready to face all sorts of dangers and obstacles in the way. Secondly, the Message was so charming that it attracted the minds and hearts of the people irresistibly towards itself. So much so that all obstacles of ignorance, superstition and petty prejudices failed to check, its advance. That is why the Arab upholders of the ways of "ignorance,' who looked down upon it in its initial stages, had' begun to reckon it as a serious menace during the last period of the stay of the Holy Prophet at Makkah, and were bent on crushing it with all the force at their command. But in spite of the above-mentioned strength, the movement still lacked certain things to lead it to victory:-

more...
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau8.html

I know the way I am viewing this is not making sense to anyone... but I have tried to explain it already... All has to be looked at within its context. And then factor in all the splinters and the corrosion of the practice over the last century...

I just know the propaganda that seems to wish we focus on the ME or the Islamists as the cause. Is for me not the correct way to view this all. I am trying to understand this in my way. My way has never be the way of most others. I am sure I am not making much sense to most here. That is okay with me.

Larani

06-07-2004, 10:09 PM

At the same time I don't get that some of those so at the ready to wish Islam destroyed , have a working knowledge either. that is why I wish there were muslim posters that would SPEAK UP. I have my own questions.

Michele I have said because the nature of Islam is not just a religion thats what makes it scary to Free Countries. I don't think many in Western countries want to see Islam destroyed they want to see it reformed.

In many post you make reference to the chronology and the time line in which a verse was written and it is the Islamists who are taking them out of there chronology, but if the Koran is anything like the NT then Muhammad's teachings like Jesus's would be consider universal truths to be applied in all times, till the end of days.

Michele

06-07-2004, 10:19 PM

Michele I have said because the nature of Islam is not just a religion thats what makes it scary to Free Countries. I don't think many in Western countries want to see Islam destroyed they want to see it reformed.

and there is call for reform as far as the theocratic way Islam applies to law. Reform is needed. I have no problem with that. For as the feminists point out even with how it is applied via the theocratic principle is not necessarily how the prophet intended.

In many post you make reference to the chronology and the time line in which a verse was written and it is the Islamists who are taking them out of there chronology,

I am aware of that. Yes that is what I am trying to get across to others about context. I feel they are mixing this up. The verse can not be taken out of context the way the Jihadists are doing. And the jihadists are also invoking prophesy the way our raptuerists or our dispensationalists are.

but if the Koran is anything like the NT then Muhammad's teachings like Jesus's would be consider universal truths to be applied in all times, till the end of days.

I am not sure the Koran in it's totality can be compared to either the OT or the NT... or perhaps the books that deal with those periods of war can be compared to the OT... while others would be compared to the NT... but I don't know the Koran well enough so I am just wondering this myself.

I know there is verse that deals with genesis for which those who practice Islam have a different interpretation altogether from the Judeo Christain interpretation.

USViking

06-07-2004, 10:35 PM

Larani

06-07-2004, 10:45 PM

Also, you said it was a myth that Islam was spread
by the sword, when in fact it surely was. And this
fact is not nullified by other religions having used
the same tactics, although I do think it fair to say
that Christianity got of to the great start it did in
Roman times by its practice of pacific martydom:
the Christians were actually fed to the lions, with
tens of thousands bearing witness, not a few of
whom became Christians themselves as a result.

It got off to a great start because that was Jesus message, He who lives by the sword dies by it. and if not him directly surely his desendants, for if you want a world of peace you cannot promote it with violence. That is a contridiction and is pure hypocrisy.

For if I kill you today surely your son will kill my son tommorrow.

Do onto others as you would have them do unto you.

I know I don't want anybody killing me so I won't kill anybody.

Michele

06-07-2004, 11:14 PM

Re Michele's of 6/7 8:06pm

Believe me, I wish complete success to
the Islamic feminists you mention.

But could Dr. Sachedina hope to get away
with saying what she does in an Islamic
country, rather than Charlottesville, Virginia, USA?
If not, then may the day soon come when she may.

actually that was my mistake that particular essay was written by a man. But I placed it for other reasons but just to highlight there is feminist discourse. If you read that essay you come to understand the difference between Islam and even the political theocracies. Also you get a sense of the divergence in interpretation, between true interpretation and that which has been distorted by the theocracy.

here is his bio.

Born in Tanzania, Abdulaziz Sachedina (abdelaziz.sachedina@islam-democracy.org) is professor of religious studies at the University of Virginia.

He has an M.A. and a Ph.D. from the University of Toronto and B.A. degrees from Aligarh Muslim University in India and Ferdowsi University in Iran. He has been visiting professor at Wilfrid Laurier, Waterloo, and McGill Universities in Canada, as well as Haverford College and the University of Jordan, Amman. He has lectured widely in East Africa, India, Pakistan, Europe, and the Middle East.

Dr. Sachedina is a core member of the Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism Project in the CSIS Preventive Diplomacy Program and a key contributor--along with Rabbi Marc Gopin and the Reverend David Steele--to the program's efforts to link religion to universal human needs and values in the service of peacebuilding.

He contributed to Human Rights and the Conflict of Cultures: Western and Islamic Perspectives on Religious Liberty (University of South Carolina Press, 1988) and recently published his study The Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism (Oxford University Press. 2001).

Dr. Sachedina areas of expertise are political Islam, religious conflict resolution through
analysis of Islamic legal tradition; Islamic roots of religious and political pluralism and human rights in the Middle East, Pakistan, and East Africa

-----------------------
It was an article that came off the Muslim feminists site. here is a site with regard to feminism in the Middle east.

Woman do participate in the law and in politics in Islamic countries. There are 5 woman that have been placed on Brahimi's interim government in Iraq. What are you reading that suggests to you feminism does not have a voice in Islamic countries? Is it the book written by Fatima Mernissi, Beyond the Veil: Male-Female Dynamics in a Modern Muslim Society.) It was written in 1975.

Apparently you did not read the introduction in this site?

http://www.arches.uga.edu/~godlas/Islamwomen.html

Also, you said it was a myth that Islam was spread
by the sword,

I did not nullify the fact. I said its use was not exclusive to Islam... Please don't put words in my mouth.

Thermopylae

06-07-2004, 11:31 PM

Well, if you have to repeatedly and clearly explain that Islam is not this or that, then I think there is something to be said about the religion's susceptibility to such actions.

Michele

06-07-2004, 11:34 PM

Well, if you have to repeatedly and clearly explain that Islam is not this or that, then I think there is something to be said about the religion's susceptibility to such actions.

oh well! There is logic for you!

Thermopylae

06-07-2004, 11:38 PM

oh well! There is logic for you!

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

Michele

06-08-2004, 12:36 AM

Michele... stick with me here for a moment... can you do that for me... just follow the line of cause and effect here...

You wrote a post about Islam in which you asserted that certain factual truths regarding Islam were in your opinion myths perpitrated against Islam instead of actual verifiable truths within the religion that is Islam.

Therefore it follows that any discussion I might have with you, refuting your assertion regarding myths as you described them about Islam would in fact pertain only to the subject matter you chose... that being Islam

what post was it where I wrote that? are you once again referring to the lead post. I didn't write those word. As I already said I cut and paste them from the site. did you happen to notice my post#3 in this thread, where I make it clear I am not stating anything definitely and state what it was I was looking for? Apparently not.

Michele

06-08-2004, 03:05 AM

Why I Am Not a Muslim
by Ibn Warraq

did you read this book? I haven't. So I looked for a review of it. I pulled one in dissent. It is a rebuttal to the book. I pulled a rebuttal because there are many factors one needs to consider when interpreting the qur'an. Some of that is elucidated in this rebuttal whether or not you agree with it or not. There are ways to approach the qur'an whether in criticism or in interpretation of verse or understanding of the books that are merely disscussions of how the verses apply.

PART I: FIVE GENERAL ERRORS COMMON TO WARRAQ AND OTHER ANTI-MUSLIM WRITERS

1. There is a failure to recognize that Islam emerges out of a past that is then integrated into Islam. Or rather, this is considered to be some kind of a flaw, rather than a simple fact of all human reality. Everything and everyone comes out of, is influenced by, and incorporates a cultural past. This would appear to be a simple fact of all reality, but seems to be a problem for anti-Muslims.

Islam, like anything in human experience, comes out of a very specific historical and cultural milieu. Thus, the word "Allah" was known and used before the Qur'anic revelation. Rituals and pilgrimages to the Ka'ba were practiced before the onset of the Qur'anic revelation and were then adapted for Muslim use. Muhammad (saws) knew of and interacted with the Jews and Christians and hanifs of the times-- he was aware of their theologies. Arabic, like all languages, incorporated words from other languages which are then in the Qur'an. This is all accepted in Islam, and causes no problems. It seems strange to me that it would. Be that as it may, it is common in anti-Muslim writings to use the above points as some kind of a negative proof against our claim that the Qur'an is a revelation from God and Muhammad is a messenger from God. Warraq is no exception, though the logic of such a position escapes me. Indeed, it seems absurd and in denial of simple reality. He also, like others hostile to (or just grossly ignorant of) Islam portrays Muhammad as a power-hungry hedonist-- perhaps not realizing that he is only repeating wartime propaganda from the Crusades?

2. There is a failure to treat the Qur'an and sunnah as a whole. Muslims themselves make this mistake, and so cannot be too upset when those hostile to Islam do it too. So, for instance, people will take ayats from the Qur'an with no reference to other qualifying ideas in the Qur'an and with no reference to the historical situation at the time of the incident of revelation. (And I didn't even mention the centuries of commentary on the Qur'an and sunnah!) We often see this in Muslims who are possessed of an inordinate hatred for our Jewish cousins, or an inordinate hatred of non-Muslims, or who are harshly judgmental towards their Muslim brothers and sisters who may understand the Qur'an and sunnah a bit differently than they do. Such people will cite verses related to times of war, take them out of context, and disconnect them from the ethos presented by the Qur'an and sunnah as a whole. This same error is then used by those hostile to Islam in order to portray the Qur'an as advocating things such as aggressive violence and abuse of women.

snip

5. Perhaps the greatest general error in Warraq's writing, and in similar writings, is yet another error also practiced by many contemporary Muslims. It is a failure to recognize the importance of literary genre when approaching the Qur'an, or any text, for that matter. That is, what "type of book" is the Qur'an? The Qur'an is not a history book, nor is it a science text.....

http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Park/6443/FAQ/warraq1b.html

PART II: SOME PROBLEMS SPECIFIC TO "WHY I AM NOT A MUSLIM"

In addition to the above general observations, and before we even begin to look at the actual text of Warraq's book we can identify two major problems from simply perusing the preface and the bibliography.

http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Park/6443/FAQ/warraq1c.html

bio on the author of the rebuttal:

Jeremiah D. McAuliffe has Ph.D. and M.A. degrees in Formative Spirituality from Duquesne University and a B.A. degree in Philosophy from Denison University. He has conducted numerous workshops and lectures on philosophy, psychology, religious studies, multi-cultural issues, and Islam. He has also taught courses at the University of Pittsburgh and Community College of Allegheny County.

and here is another work of his (it is not related in topic):
http://www.globalresearch.org/view_article.php?aid=796484210

You have only provided the "historical" context of one quote provided above from the Koran, which is not at all the same thing as providing any context as to how that quote is presented within the Koran as a teaching of Islamic principles today.

There is a difference.

If you haven't any idea from what book it has been pulled, it's context within the history itself, or even whether or not what you have pulled is the whole of the actual verse, how in the world can you assertain how it is interpreted today? And whose interpretation are we talking about? The interpretation of anyone of the theocratic governments? The interpretation of an orthodox Muslim cleric? The interpretation of any one of the radical mullah's? or the Interpretation as used within any one of the current Islamist manifestos?

I illustrate in the thread "killing Americans" another reason why pulling the quotes out of context do not suffice, especially if you have not pulled them yourself from the verse. One of the quotes you listed from chapter two...it was koran 2:92 or 2:98 (i can't remember which) was not even pulled accurately from the whole of the verse.

The illustration is in the above named thread you will have to find it.

Michele

06-08-2004, 03:52 PM

No offence Michelle but screw Islam and the horse it rode in on. I wish I could slice and dice each and every Islamaniac, slowly, and I view their religion as one who fertilizes hate and breeds the lowest of humans. The Muslim terrorist actions, and the inaction of the decent ones, validate my feelings.

yes but what fertilizes the hatred of the Judeo christain zeolots throughout history? And this same form of zeal is on the rise and would work as a minority under the umbrella of a democratic order within the realm of their fundamentalism. Over time all came within a secular separation of church and state but for Islam. Why not Islam? What is the difference in the formation of our nation over those under Islam? That difference in circumstance and enviroment has to be considered as well. For our nation had been handled in the same way the ME region was...we too would have a problem with Fundamentalism to the degree that they have a problem with it in the ME.

That is the question, and the only answer as far as diagnosing cause of Islamist fomentation is not only Islam (for these same corruptions of the sword are evident in Judeo Christain text as well as within their ethos). But the circumstances of Christainity as practiced here under purely secular law is different than the circumstances as they arose after the Ottoman's fell. It doesn't matter that the Crusades were in response to the expansion of the Ottoman's.

As someone said to me recently we have whatever precentage of muslims living quite peacefully here in America and all over the world. So it is not the practice of the religion that is fomenting anything. It is the need for the viligance of the Islamists (who are using verse to justify what they preceive as their defensive resistance to the presence of outsiders who have always been at odds with their religion).

Religious fundamentalism within our country fell under the guidance dictated by the separation of church and state which only worked because our nation has not been meddled with from the outside (due to geo political reasons and resources) to the degree that this region has been since ottoman fell.

I am not defending Islam over all other religions... but the regression in their practice I do believe correlates to the meddling from the outside that has taken place since the mandate era.

This is the premise that falls within the Ameriano-centric blind spot. Our religious zealots would neither have been reined in either if our nation as it was mandated from colonies into states then had to deal with harrassment from 4 or 5 other outside entites.