[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
For some reason I don’t think you would ever imagine of making a thread about violent, hateful, murdering Christians.
Because those don’t exist, right?[/quote]
Go for it.
[quote]pat wrote:
9. Muhammad commands in his Quran that adulterers and adulteresses should receive a hundred lashes.
24:2 Strike the adulteress and the adulterer one hundred times. Do not let compassion for them keep you from carrying out God’s law�??if you believe in God and the Last Day�??and ensure that a group of believers witnesses the punishment. (Haleem)
The supposed historical context of this sura occurs during a raid of a tribe in December 627 or January 628, on which Muhammad brought his favorite and youngest wife, Aisha, also the daughter of Abu Bakr, his right�??hand lieutenant. After the Muslims’ victory, they journeyed back to Medina, one hundred and fifty miles to the north. On their last halt, Aisha answered the call of nature, but lost her necklace in the dark, just as the army was setting out from their encampment early in the morning. She left her litter, returned to look for the necklace, and found it. Meanwhile, the man leading her camel assumed she was in her curtained litter and led the animal away by the halter. Returning, Aisha saw that she was left behind.
However, a handsome young Muslim named Safwan saw her and accompanied her back to Medina, though both the Muslims and Muhammad’s opposition wagged their tongues at seeing the two youngsters entering the city together. Eventually, revelation came that Aisha was not guilty of any immorality.
Sura 24 thus establishes some ground rules against adultery, of which flogging one hundred times is one of the rules. Amazingly, 24:2 exhorts the accusers and judges not to let compassion keep them from carrying out God’s law.
[/quote]
Question abot Islam…
If Gabriel told the Koran to Muhammad, why would there be a historical context to this? The story of Muhammad’s wife above…did Muhammad tell Gabriel the story and Gabriel said “to stop this from ever happening again, you should flog the adulterer a hundred times.”?
In other words, historically, how was the Koran written, and why did things which happened in Muhammad’s life effect the text?
to my understanding, Gabriel was merely the middleman between Muhammad and God. So anything Muhammad recieved was the word from God. Also, the Koran was revealed to Muhammad over a period of time, not all at once. so each revelation would at times be a reference to an incident that was occuring at that time.
also, the Koran wasnt exactly written at first but memorised and collected by the followers. it was during the periods of war when many of the people who had memorised the messages started dying that they decided to collect it all and put it into a book. the collection was put together and then verified before being copied.
hope that helps.
Thanks
So… I’m gonna throw out the radical idea that religions change due to the social needs and requirements of their present society. Different regions interpret the same religion differently, and develop different customs based upon those interpretations. Any cultural anthropologist will tell you this.
It’s impossible to keep a religion from being changed after the prophet-founder dies. The only way to safeguard a faith is to provide an unassailable lineage, which exists in very few faiths (for the record, Islam would be one of them, but Ali got butchered before he had the chance to lead, so that cuts that one out right there).
That said, the best you can really do is attack a given culture’s interpretation of religion. And that culture is going to be influenced by it’s economic status, trade relations, government, and history. Religion has to be veiwed in context.
In short, Islam is many things to many people. Attacking religion itself is an act of stupidity. Decrying the motivations of certain people, on the other hand, is an intelligent use of self expression.
[quote]pat wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
Okay, I’ve been following some of these posts for some time and I’d like to jump in here.
I’m an anglo-catholic and admittedly I don’t know all that much about Islam. From my point of view, I encounter so many misunderstandings about the Catholic Church - and I know from personal experience that it is extremely difficult to educate someone about the Church outside the the faith - that I know I must, in all fairness, approach Islam with a huge amount of humility.
My girlfriend of many years grew up Muslim. I have watched her struggle with Islam; I have watched the dynamics of her Muslim family. This did not give me a very favorable impression of Islam, to be honest. And, recently, during Easter service here in Boston, she was baptized into the Anglo-catholic tradition. She is, I should add, terrified to tell her parents or family. In short, I do have impressions of Islam from a personal perspective - though they may be misinformed, incorrect, or not applicable to Islam more generally.
In trying to educate myself about Islam, I have found that materials fall into two general sources. 1. academic sources that - to me, at least - seem to reek of PC bullshit, not to put too fine a point on it. 2. sources from the likes of people like Spencer - his books and videos such as, for example, “Islam: What the West Needs to Know” (can be found on Youtube.)
Spencer’s presentation of Islam seems unassailable, though I’m perfectly aware that it may well be a one-sided presentation of the facts. I am eager, in fact, to find a reputable discussion of those facts from another perspective, especially one that pointedly refutes his analysis. Indeed, I would love to see someone debate Spencer.
If anyone would point me in the right direction here, I’d appreciate it. Cheers to all, ~katz
Please don’t hold your breath for a reasoned rebuttal of Spencer. I’ve looked for several myself. Every “rebuttal” consists of ad hominem against Spencer, tu-quoque about Christianity, and taqiyya and kitman about the Muslim understanding of the Qur’an. Go read some of the reviews of his books by Muslims on Amazon - you’ll get the general drift.
None of Muslims here correct my understanding of their doctrine. When I bring in examples from the Hadith or Qur’an or Qur’anic commentary (Tafsir), they call me a bigot, ridicule me, or say that I’m being unchristian (tu-quoque), like on the other thread.
The fact that your g/f is terrified of telling her family about her baptism means that she’s afraid of ending up an honor killing statistic. As Mohammed said, “If anyone leaves their religion (meaning Islam), kill them.”
You can read the Sunni understanding of apostasy right out of their own mouths:
Thus, according to the Qur’an, as a result of the advent of the Messenger of God in the Banu Ishmael, those who rejected faith from amongst the polytheists were subject to the death penalty, under the provisions of the Divine Law relating to the advent of God’s messengers. If any of these polytheists had accepted Islam at the hands of the Messenger and later decides to return to his previous beliefs, then he too should be grouped with those who had rejected the call of the messenger and, thus, also be subjected to the same punishment. If seen in this perspective, the narrative under consideration actually means that those people who were to be punished, according to the law of God, had they not accepted Islam, would face the same punishment, if at any time during their lives they leave the folds of Islam and return to their previous beliefs.
But what do I know? I’m just a bigot - just the infidel version of lixy on this forum.
In other words, she should be afraid and probably would be best to not tell them. That, or tell them over the phone from a far away location.
[/quote]
She’s from a prominent (Bangladeshi) family of poets, judges, & journalists. Some of them live here in the US. I don’t think she’s going to tell them anything. If we were to get married, I’m not sure what we’d do.
So, you’re meaning to tell me that no one has responded to Spencer et al with reasoned, point-for-point rebuttals??
That says something none-too-positive about Islam & Muslims. It’s pathetic, actually. Why don’t the reasonable, peace-loving Muslims stand up and proffer a substantive, reasoned alternative? Perhaps these are the same Muslims who continually fail to speak out against the “Islamo-fascists.” They’d rather sit quietly and say nothing - and implicitly condone it. I know what I’m talking about because I’ve sat among them in living rooms and at dining tables for years, while recent world events transpired. Even after 9/11, they either said nothing - or they remarked casually that americans deserved it. And these are seemingly normal, highly educated (MIT, Wharton, etc.) people otherwise enjoying the liberty, security, & high standard of living here in America.
Nor does any of this bode well for the future of Christian-Islamic relations. Frightening.
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Okay, I’ve been following some of these posts for some time and I’d like to jump in here.
I’m an anglo-catholic and admittedly I don’t know all that much about Islam. From my point of view, I encounter so many misunderstandings about the Catholic Church - and I know from personal experience that it is extremely difficult to educate someone about the Church outside the the faith - that I know I must, in all fairness, approach Islam with a huge amount of humility.
My girlfriend of many years grew up Muslim. I have watched her struggle with Islam; I have watched the dynamics of her Muslim family. This did not give me a very favorable impression of Islam, to be honest. And, recently, during Easter service here in Boston, she was baptized into the Anglo-catholic tradition. She is, I should add, terrified to tell her parents or family. In short, I do have impressions of Islam from a personal perspective - though they may be misinformed, incorrect, or not applicable to Islam more generally.
In trying to educate myself about Islam, I have found that materials fall into two general sources. 1. academic sources that - to me, at least - seem to reek of PC bullshit, not to put too fine a point on it. 2. sources from the likes of people like Spencer - his books and videos such as, for example, “Islam: What the West Needs to Know” (can be found on Youtube.)
Spencer’s presentation of Islam seems unassailable, though I’m perfectly aware that it may well be a one-sided presentation of the facts. I am eager, in fact, to find a reputable discussion of those facts from another perspective, especially one that pointedly refutes his analysis. Indeed, I would love to see someone debate Spencer.
If anyone would point me in the right direction here, I’d appreciate it. Cheers to all, ~katz [/quote]
Let’s get one thing straight: Islam’s PR is just horrible. Besides Wahabism and its variations, there’s neither money nor efforts put into educating people about the faith or its essence. In fact, along with a poor (or even non-existing) command of the Arabic language, this lack of religious education becomes a valuable asset in Ben-Laden’s bag.
Most self-proclaimed Muslims learn about Islam by observation. There’s little analysis or theology involved in the process as should be made obvious by the profusion of bida’at (sing. bid’ah) throughout the Islamic world.
Anyone who’s seen the pathetic responses to Wilders’ video would tell you the same thing: Islam’s PR sucks!
And I’m sure you have noticed by now, the attacks on the religion, its messenger and the Ummah in general are relentless and virulent in their nature.
From all this demonization of Islam, there is one obvious victor in the radical Islamists who can now point fingers at some of the gratuitous provocations or heinous acts and say “I told you so”.
So that now, not only are they promising to “liberate” the people from the tyranny of the dictators ruling them, but they have an even more palpable and tangible cause to fight: the occupation of majority-Muslim lands by imperialist powers (think Iraq).
It is often asked why Muslims aren’t doing more to better the image of their faith, and the stone cold truth is that most are still struggling with survival. There’s also a striking difference between the attitude of the Anglo-saxon world and the rest, but that’s another topic.
It’s a sad state of affairs when Islam’s most far-reaching voice is Wahabism. I am personally very pessimistic vis-a-vis the future of this issue. I think that the point of no return was reached after the invasion of Iraq. Now, ignorance is taking over and there are serious barriers to overcome just to iniate a debate.
Prejudice on both sides is growing at lightning speed and there’s hardly anything anyone can do about it. Honestly, I don’t give a damn what Wilders, Coulter, Pat or that PRCalDude thinks of my religion. They’re free to say anything they want and from my perspective, they’re just making themselves look like idiots.
However, what I find troublesome is the ammo they’re laying right in the hands of radicals Islamists. A sort of vicious circle if you will.
Any questions you may have I’ll be happy to answer. There’s plenty to be said on the matter, so please formulate specific and concise questions.
Cheers,
/lixy
P.S; I am a man! Not that I grant much importance to pronouns, but it’s worth noting in case you want to respond to my post.
Hey Lixy, what about the Muslims living in the UAE, they seem to be progressive types. Are they Wahabis?
The invasion of Iraq wasn’t a point of no return, Muslim PR hit a point of no return decades ago.
they are still talking about the Palestinian massacre of the Olympic athletes on the news and comparing it to the events in China where the Uyghur separtists were trying the same stuff. If this were not true or a set up, why didn’t the Chinese just blame terrorists from Tibet? It would have discredited their cause.
Anyway, right…Muslims need better PR. I have been saying that right along.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Hey Lixy, what about the Muslims living in the UAE, they seem to be progressive types. Are they Wahabis? [/quote]
The majority of them aren’t. They’re regular Sunnis who, if I’m not mistaken, are primarily following Malik’s school of jurisprudence.
They’re hardly what I would call “progressive”. Malikis have been around for over 14 centuries.
In Islam, you have to realize that Wahabism is the aberration. It’s originated in the later part of the 18th century, and was used as a political tool to overthrow the Ottomans and occupy land.
Look up the massacres the Ibn Sauds have been unleashing on the region after the birth of Wahabism. They went into Karbala and started slaughtering unarmed people left and right. Not that the place is any better now…
I wrote “personally”, knowing that somebody else’s point of view might differ.
But I think you misunderstood. It’s not Islam’s PR that hit a point of no return on an infamous day in March 2003.
It’s the prospect of dialog between cultures that was shattered. It wasn’t bright to begin with (for a myriad of reasons which I’m sure you can deduce on your own), but that day showed beyond a shadow of a doubt, the American disdain for peace, human life and people with brown skin. It transcended the Muslim world.
And if you have any doubts about the irreversible damage it has done to communication bridges, go in a mosque anywhere on the planet and ask people how badly they were hurt by the bombs blasting Iraq and the images of burnt women and amputated babies.
Seriously, it’s hard to find the words to express the outrage the Muslim community felt on that day. I know for a fact that the Casablanca bombings would been a gazillion times harder to pull off.
Err…who’s “they”?
They need better PR in the Anglo-saxon world. But I wouldn’t hold my breath. PR is an industry, and the people with money willing to inject cash in such endeavors are pretty much all on the dark side. See, Muslims are A LOT and they’ve never really suffered or been threatened on a massive scale (except for the Palestinians, but in proportion to the Ummah, that was nothing).
To put it another way, Muslims in general don’t give two shits what a guy sitting in Ohio thinks of them or their faith. It is a grave mistake in my opinion but I don’t see things changing any time soon.
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
pat wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
Okay, I’ve been following some of these posts for some time and I’d like to jump in here.
I’m an anglo-catholic and admittedly I don’t know all that much about Islam. From my point of view, I encounter so many misunderstandings about the Catholic Church - and I know from personal experience that it is extremely difficult to educate someone about the Church outside the the faith - that I know I must, in all fairness, approach Islam with a huge amount of humility.
My girlfriend of many years grew up Muslim. I have watched her struggle with Islam; I have watched the dynamics of her Muslim family. This did not give me a very favorable impression of Islam, to be honest. And, recently, during Easter service here in Boston, she was baptized into the Anglo-catholic tradition. She is, I should add, terrified to tell her parents or family. In short, I do have impressions of Islam from a personal perspective - though they may be misinformed, incorrect, or not applicable to Islam more generally.
In trying to educate myself about Islam, I have found that materials fall into two general sources. 1. academic sources that - to me, at least - seem to reek of PC bullshit, not to put too fine a point on it. 2. sources from the likes of people like Spencer - his books and videos such as, for example, “Islam: What the West Needs to Know” (can be found on Youtube.)
Spencer’s presentation of Islam seems unassailable, though I’m perfectly aware that it may well be a one-sided presentation of the facts. I am eager, in fact, to find a reputable discussion of those facts from another perspective, especially one that pointedly refutes his analysis. Indeed, I would love to see someone debate Spencer.
If anyone would point me in the right direction here, I’d appreciate it. Cheers to all, ~katz
Please don’t hold your breath for a reasoned rebuttal of Spencer. I’ve looked for several myself. Every “rebuttal” consists of ad hominem against Spencer, tu-quoque about Christianity, and taqiyya and kitman about the Muslim understanding of the Qur’an. Go read some of the reviews of his books by Muslims on Amazon - you’ll get the general drift.
None of Muslims here correct my understanding of their doctrine. When I bring in examples from the Hadith or Qur’an or Qur’anic commentary (Tafsir), they call me a bigot, ridicule me, or say that I’m being unchristian (tu-quoque), like on the other thread.
The fact that your g/f is terrified of telling her family about her baptism means that she’s afraid of ending up an honor killing statistic. As Mohammed said, “If anyone leaves their religion (meaning Islam), kill them.”
You can read the Sunni understanding of apostasy right out of their own mouths:
Thus, according to the Qur’an, as a result of the advent of the Messenger of God in the Banu Ishmael, those who rejected faith from amongst the polytheists were subject to the death penalty, under the provisions of the Divine Law relating to the advent of God’s messengers. If any of these polytheists had accepted Islam at the hands of the Messenger and later decides to return to his previous beliefs, then he too should be grouped with those who had rejected the call of the messenger and, thus, also be subjected to the same punishment. If seen in this perspective, the narrative under consideration actually means that those people who were to be punished, according to the law of God, had they not accepted Islam, would face the same punishment, if at any time during their lives they leave the folds of Islam and return to their previous beliefs.
But what do I know? I’m just a bigot - just the infidel version of lixy on this forum.
In other words, she should be afraid and probably would be best to not tell them. That, or tell them over the phone from a far away location.
She’s from a prominent (Bangladeshi) family of poets, judges, & journalists. Some of them live here in the US. I don’t think she’s going to tell them anything. If we were to get married, I’m not sure what we’d do.
So, you’re meaning to tell me that no one has responded to Spencer et al with reasoned, point-for-point rebuttals??
That says something none-too-positive about Islam & Muslims. It’s pathetic, actually. Why don’t the reasonable, peace-loving Muslims stand up and proffer a substantive, reasoned alternative? Perhaps these are the same Muslims who continually fail to speak out against the “Islamo-fascists.” They’d rather sit quietly and say nothing - and implicitly condone it. I know what I’m talking about because I’ve sat among them in living rooms and at dining tables for years, while recent world events transpired. Even after 9/11, they either said nothing - or they remarked casually that americans deserved it. And these are seemingly normal, highly educated (MIT, Wharton, etc.) people otherwise enjoying the liberty, security, & high standard of living here in America.
Nor does any of this bode well for the future of Christian-Islamic relations. Frightening.
[/quote]
At issue is the truth claims of the religion itself. What is the orthodox understanding of various Islamic doctrines? Well, I quoted Muslims themselves in their understanding of how to treat apostates above. Now we’re talking about how Islam needs better PR. What about my post above? Are these Muslims wrong in what they were saying, and I’ve read the wrong site, or not? No one cares to address that question, and that’s the exact thing Muslims do with Spencer, or they’ll quote a minority, unorthodox opinion in Islam and pass it off as orthodox, as Ali Eteraz likes to do. They trail off into various non sequiturs in an effort to redirect the conversation and not answer the original question.
Sounds like your g/f hopefully isn’t in as much danger of an honor killing as those poor girls in Texas recently, but it’s definitely good to be aware of their doctrine regarding the matter. It always helps to keep your eyes peeled.
Here’s one review I pulled off of Amazon, which is somewhat representative:
Great rebuttal there.
Here’s another:
[quote]umm ignorance is bliss. most of the arguments used are nothing new and are but a collection of old european prejudices ranging from brits to the french. well we muslims have seen this through the last 1000 years and there is no reason for us to suppose that its going to stop anytime soon. something akin to the protocols of the elders of zion. or antisemitism. actually most people dont even realise that being anti arab and anti muslim makes u an anti-semite. yes arabs too are semites. and even though there are non arab muslims, its the same as having non semitic jews, jewish tribes from africa, india are hardly considered semitic. so i would argue that mr robert spencer first and foremost is an antisemite and must be branded so.
now the prophet muhammed on whom eternal peace be bestowed upon as we wish for moses and jesus, was a great man, ayesha his supposedly 9 year old wife is controversial since not even she knew her true age when she was married. imagine how important was it keeping up with ur birthdays 1400 years ago, its a subject of considerable debate and the woman ayesha was considerably aware of herself and what was happening to her. if anyone cares to read the memoirs of ayesha, then they will find that she remembered her marriage quite clearly and was able to give consent to her marriage with maturity and clarity. she was also quite anxious for marriage and not a little proud at the thought of marrying the prophet. not exactly the sort of things that go around in a 9 year olds head. there is no doubt that she was young but exaclty how old remains a matter of conjecture. consider that even the prophets birthday is not exactly known and is a matter of debate.t hings in those days were not as precise as living in the modern age. consider this that there is very little physical evidence proving the existence of jesus, but for religous texts including the quran. as for the jewish tribe that was destroyed, please read deeper. they betrayed the prophet and planned his destruction. muhammed asked a jewish tribal leader what was the punishment for their behaviour and what was meted out was standard protocol of the time. muhammad was but a man, above all a human with the same human desires that flow in us, a man with power, a man who had to go through the same ordeals, temptations, greed, avarice that we go through in our daily lives. he was a man who brought the word of god to us but trembled at the thought of judgement day. he feared for his soul till the last day. he was not even certain where his destiny lay in heaven or hell though being a great prophet. certainly he might have made mistakes, errors, for which he was truly apologetic. does that not make him human and a better person. that is the miracle that the tv evangelicals can never fathom that a man like muhammad, a good man but decidedly very human with the self doubts, anxiety that afflicts us all at some stage. how could he have had the power to become the most powerful man on earth in the desert and that the former illiterate goat herder could lay waste to three of the biggest empires of that time, the roman empire, the persian empire, and the byzantine empire. and in its place came islam like a tidal wave of energy, soon omnipresent and still the fastest growing religion on the planet. can islam become the religion of mankind. is that what the fear is, it certainly was when the pope declared the crusades of the 11th century and now the neo crusades launched. the players are different but the game is ancient. muhammed is dead and gone. we are grateful to him for bringing the message but his job is over. for all the islamophobes we say have the courage to deal with us directly and not take cheap pot shots at a dead man. how would you feel if some one slandered your dead fathers life . as a son i would say do u really want a piece of me now. so for all the robert spencers of the world remember truth will prevail and islam will only be stronger. for every crusade there is a Saladin waiting to happen. amen[/quote]
“Islamophobe”… “fastest growing religion”… “Mohammed made mistakes but was still a good man.”
You get the idea.
Damn, never miss a chance to bust on the US. Sure, all the blame is on us as far as a dialogue between cultures go…
Nevermind the fact that muslims likewise have been and still are blowing up people all over the world for the past 50 years and if it makes you feel better to compare this to the actions of the US who were in a war with the global expantion of Communists, a far greater evil, then so be it.
Funny that these same muslims who are angry about the burned women and amputated children, (what, don’t they kill men, or are the men the mostly the suicide bombers who have caused this?). they do not consider that most of the violence in Iraq is Muslim on Muslim.
And as far as Al-Qaeda not being in Iraq before the Iraq war, you seem to give Saddam’s atrocities a pass, and seem to forget that Al-Qaeda was also in countries in every part of the world and we did not bring them there.
Yet you never condmen the atrocities they committed in India for example. What? Burnt Muslim women and children are more important than burnt and maimed Hindu women and children? Or Chinese, Or English, or Jewish, or African or South American? -all victims of muslim terrorists.
As far as the Malikis being progressive, I was speaking of the economic expansion of the UAE that has been going on for the last 2 decades.
The grave mistake is too many poor uneducated Muslims have been brainwashed by radical elements to think exactly like you do and this is truely sad.
oh yeah, “they” is the news outlets who broadcast the story of the Muslim terrorists plotting to strike the Chinese Olympics.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
At issue is the truth claims of the religion itself. What is the orthodox understanding of various Islamic doctrines? Well, I quoted Muslims themselves in their understanding of how to treat apostates above. Now we’re talking about how Islam needs better PR. [/quote]
They need to have someone, some authority, explain exactly what the truth of the religion claims. They can say that stoning is wrong, or such and such a statement is taken out of context, mistranslated or other such things. Go to Youtube and check out a muslim being stoned to death. This is a reality and it is happening in the same day and age as computers and cam-corders.
That’s why you can have a guy in a cave in Afghanistan or a house in Sudan making policy for muslims and others not being able to dispute is since it is up for everyone’s intrepretation, and whether or not they are in the majority or the minority, or in the government of countries which support stonings and whippings.
If people like Ayatollah Khomeni or Bin Laden were not speaking about Islam as represented in the Koran, why would so many people follow them blindly?
There were Christians like this 1000 years ago, but we no longer fight and kill to expand the borders of our religion and when sentiments like this pop up in places like Serbia, it is frownded upon and destroyed.
Too bad the same sentiment to destroy the radicals does not exist in Islam.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Damn, never miss a chance to bust on the US. Sure, all the blame is on us as far as a dialogue between cultures go… [/quote]
If you have to twist my words, then I won’t do you the courtesy of reading your post.
"It wasn’t bright to begin with (for a myriad of reasons which I’m sure you can deduce on your own), but that day showed beyond a shadow of a doubt, the American disdain for peace, human life and people with brown skin. It transcended the Muslim world.
And if you have any doubts about the irreversible damage it has done to communication bridges, go in a mosque anywhere on the planet and ask people how badly they were hurt by the bombs blasting Iraq and the images of burnt women and amputated babies. Seriously, it’s hard to find the words to express the outrage the Muslim community felt on that day."
Suit yourself.
“The American disdain for peace, human life and people with brown skin,” “burnt women, amputated babies,” sure sounds like blasting the US to me.
My apologies if I misread something somewhere.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
“The American disdain for peace, human life and people with brown skin,” “burnt women, amputated babies,” sure sounds like blasting the US to me.
My apologies if I misread something somewhere.[/quote]
It’s not the “blasting the US” that I challenged. It’s the ludicrous “all the blame is on us as far as a dialogue between cultures go”. I blast all countries and I reserve a particularly special place for the ones that make their military fly and sail half way across the world to overthrow, kill and invade other lands. Deal with it.
And if you prefer to delude yourself into thinking that everyone hates you for your freedoms or that criticism of the US is rooted in some irrational thoughts, there’s not much I can do about it. I have plenty of Chinese acquaintances who call me anti-Chinese every time I don’t miss a chance to criticize Beijing’s regime. They’re subjected to blatant propaganda. What’s your excuse??
[quote]lixy wrote:
Let’s get one thing straight: Islam’s PR is just horrible. [/quote]
Thanks for your response - I’ll formulate some specific questions for you, and I am eager to hear what you have to say.
Meantime, on the above: I’m not sure it’s only about formal PR, though no doubt that’s a problem as well. Surely there are Muslim scholars who have the time & resources to rebut Spencer, right? Do they not think its worth their time? Are they for one reason or another bound from doing so?
Conversely, when the Catholic Church is criticized, hundreds of clergy, scholars, apologists, etc., come out of the woodwork to affirm the criticism, or to contextualize it, or to explain it away.
Where are the equivalents in Islam??? And I don’t mean an orchestrated PR campaign, I just mean articles & books and videos produced by individuals, institutions, think tanks, etc.
~katz
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
At issue is the truth claims of the religion itself. What is the orthodox understanding of various Islamic doctrines? Well, I quoted Muslims themselves in their understanding of how to treat apostates above. Now we’re talking about how Islam needs better PR. What about my post above? Are these Muslims wrong in what they were saying, and I’ve read the wrong site, or not? No one cares to address that question, and that’s the exact thing Muslims do with Spencer, or they’ll quote a minority, unorthodox opinion in Islam and pass it off as orthodox, as Ali Eteraz likes to do. They trail off into various non sequiturs in an effort to redirect the conversation and not answer the original question.
[/quote]
Hey, well I’m hoping that, along with Lixy here, we can actually make some progress in asking & answering some of these questions. High hopes for a forum like this I know, but let’s give it a shot.
I sent that link you put in to my girlfriend, and her exact response was: “THe whole web site is scary. It seems like the religion is full of “though shalts” to justify killing people” So even she was shocked by what the Qur’an actually says about apostasy, among other things.
So, perhaps the first question I would have for Lixy is, how are we supposed to understand a command like that, which seems baldly unambiguous?
Towards the bottom, the annotation says: "In some narratives, as in Mu’atta Imam Malik’s narrative no. 1413, the word “�?ا�?ت�?�?�?” (i.e., ‘kill him’) have been replaced with a synonymous phrase “�?اضرب�?ا ع�?�?�?” (i.e., ‘break his neck’).
What possible interpretation - cultural, political, historical, linguistic, theological - could justify these sorts of words in a holy text?? Lixy, help us out here!!
Anyway, yeah, those Amazon reviews are, of course, complete nonsense.
[quote]lixy wrote:
And if you prefer to delude yourself into thinking that everyone hates you for your freedoms or that criticism of the US is rooted in some irrational thoughts, there’s not much I can do about it. I have plenty of Chinese acquaintances who call me anti-Chinese every time I don’t miss a chance to criticize Beijing’s regime. They’re subjected to blatant propaganda. What’s your excuse??[/quote]
You seem to hate us for our freedom to vote…
I am subjected to blatant propaganda as well.
So what you are saying is that all the problems your religion faces today, all the “propaganda” in the movie Fitna, for example, the fact that there are islamic nutjobs both ruling countries and in hiding, is all the fault of the US’s foreign policy? Because if that is not the case it sure comes across like that in your posts.
[quote]I sent that link you put in to my girlfriend, and her exact response was: “THe whole web site is scary. It seems like the religion is full of “though shalts” to justify killing people” So even she was shocked by what the Qur’an actually says about apostasy, among other things.
[/quote]
If you thought that was interesting, you’ll love this:
It’s run by a guy living in Virginia named Samir Khan. you should read through some of his essays where he defends jihad, shari’ah, and hatred of infidels with Islamic texts and doctrine. What an Islamophobe!
Interesting site.
If we say someone should deport the bastard, they’ll say we are anti-Muslim.
Ironic, no?