I’m not going to teach you or Lixy anything about Islam. It is also quite obvious that nothing I can write would even so much as cause you two to think about or question your religion.
I get your point. In Islam one must await instruction from a proper authority. Then after the instruction has been administered that is it. No thinking about it. Because as we all know independent thought is dangerous.
It must be hard having to reply with continued sidestepping. [/quote]
Sidestepping? How?
[quote]
You don’t get the point because much like your mate Shaykh Bill Roberts, you have a very hard time grasping sensible concepts but have a very easy time twisting ideas to suit your preconceived agendas. In essence, you’re cups full with your bias and hatred. Pour as much common sense and truth into it as you want but it’s content remaining full with what it has.
Therefore you jump from conclusion to conclusion rather foundation-less and think you’re coming up with plausible responses. [/quote]
Now you are contradicting yourself. All along you have been saying that Islam must be taught by a qualified teacher because it’s a science that is too complicated to be self taught. Now you are saying it is sensible concepts. If it is sensible would it not be readily understood?
[quote]
Thanks Habibi! You gave me a good laugh.
Teaching people to kill over religion is dangerous.
That’s a sensational conclusion. I now ask you to provide evidence for your statement, that is The Quran TEACHES people to kill for Islam. I require a direct quote with the commentary and context from classical scholars. Otherwise give it up. I’m not holding my breath though because like all sensationalists, you cut and paste, chop and edit, snippet and misplace, misquote, de-contextualize and create a paper mache’ idea that suits you of what a religon means. [/quote]
Koran, Hadith, Surrah, It’s all part of a whole. Isn’t it? From what I have read of them Mohammad and his gang did a whole lot of killing. If Mohammad did it, it must be okay. Right?
If killing for Islam isn’t part of the religion why do the four main schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that the penalty for apostasy should be execution? Are you saying that respected scholars of Islamic law are wrong, too?
[quote]
This is largely the problem with much of western thought towards all religions. A blatant disrespect for the particular religions rules and boundaries and therefore it is acceptable to dissect it the way you see fit and create your own conclusions.
This is the same problem we have internally with Muslims as mentioned for the nth time interpreting law the way they want and not in accordance with traditional and scholarly understanding.
From my discussions with Lixy and now you I get the distinct impression that trying to talk to a Muslim about their religion is like trying to talk to a crackhead about their addiction. The reason why is because you all do the same thing. You use a technique called rationalization in order to avoid facing up to reality.
You’ve got to be kidding right? I mean surely in a discussion like this we would never want rational arguments. (sarcasm)[/quote]
Here is what I meant by rationalization.
In psychology and logic, rationalization is the process of constructing a logical justification for a belief, decision, action or lack thereof that was originally arrived at through a different mental process. It is a defense mechanism in which unacceptable behaviors or feelings are explained in a rational or logical manner; this avoids the true explanation of the behavior or feeling in question.[1][2]
This process can be in a range from fully conscious (e.g. to present an external defense against ridicule from others) to mostly subconscious (e.g. to create a block against internal feelings of guilt).
Rationalization is one of the defense mechanisms proposed by Sigmund Freud, which were later developed further by his daughter Anna Freud.
According to the DSM-IV rationalization occurs “when the individual deals with emotional conflict or internal or external stressors by concealing the true motivations for his or her own thoughts, actions, or feelings through the elaboration of reassuring or self serving but incorrect explanations.”
[quote]
But yes, I’m addicted to Islam. I enjoy practicing as best I can and I enjoy following it’s rules. Rest assured, I don’t live in a cave, have a beard, blow things up nor have a desire to unless it has cubic inches and sits inside a curvaceous motor body. I don’t bash women, my wife works and smacks me around sometimes, my children sing nursery rhymes and not war hymns and I pretty much help run one of the largest retailers in Australia… that might all come to an end though because the likes of you have blown my cover…
I think your point got lost in the translation.
No it’s there if you think hard enough.
My understanding of religion is that if a religion has a flesh and blood human being as it’s most central figure, who is adored and worshipped as if he is almost god incarnate, then that mans behavior and actions will have a huge influence upon the behaviors and actions of, the practitioners of that religion.
My understanding of human behavior is that actions speak louder than words.
Both understandings are correct.
Where you fail is that you’re not armed with enough information and true knowledge of what Islam teaches as opposed to what it’s adherents practice (or so called adherents) and therefore fail miserably at differentiating between people and doctrine. You lump them together and out they go. Baby with the bath water.
Such a very sad way to live your life. [/quote]
I do realize that not all Muslims behave like Mohammad did and instead have some decency. But there are also a lot of Muslims who do act like Mohammad did, they are why we are having the problems we are having now.
So all the problems that Muslims cause with other people is a result of them not properly understanding the religion and has nothing to do with anything that is in the religion itself?
I can see all of the following applying to your explanations. I also think that there are quite a few other people on this board who should read and reread the part about projection.
Repression/Suppression – Repression is often thought of as the parent of all defenses. Repression involves putting painful thoughts and memories out of our minds and forgetting them. All defenses do this to some extent. Traditionally, repression is unconsciously “forgetting,” that is, forgetting and not even realizing that you are doing it. You have no conscious memory or knowledge of that which is repressed. Suppression is when you consciously forget something, or make the choice to avoid thinking about it.
Denial – Denial is the simplest defense to understand. It is simply the refusal to acknowledge what has, is, or will happen. “My partner didn’t have an affair, but was simply traveling for work a lot.” A related defense is Minimizing. When you minimize you technically accept what happened, but only in a “watered down” form. “Sure, I have been drinking a bit too much lately, but it’s only due to stresses at work; I don’t really have a drinking problem since this is situational and not an inner weakness or something.”
Fantasy – Fantasy can be a good or a pathological defense. Fantasizing involves creating an inner world when the real world becomes too painful, difficult, or stressful. Thinking about your upcoming vacation when work gets stressful is a healthy use of fantasy. However, if you don’t solve problems, but only daydream about them being solved for you, if you avoid potentially problematic responsibilities and only fantasize about having rewarding challenges and experiences, fantasy becomes too much.
Projection – Projection is something we all do. It is the act of taking something of ourselves and placing it outside of us, onto others; sometimes we project positive and sometimes negative aspects of ourselves. Sometimes we project things we don’t want to acknowledge about ourselves, and so we turn it around and put it on others (i.e., “It’s not that I made a stupid mistake, it’s that you are critical of everything I do!”).
[quote]tom63 wrote:
Then show me the major muslim religious leaders condemning terrorism, suicide bombings, and such. [/quote]
I don’t have to show you anything. And I certainly won’t be the one to tell you how “terrorism” is a very broad term.
If you’re stupid enough to believe “major muslim religious leaders” are not condemning innocent deaths, it’s not exactly my problem. Blame your lazy ass, narrow mind, homogenized social circle and whatever media’s dispensing “The Truth” to you.
And if they did, they’d be in jail.
What’s your point?
“Bombings”? When? 1993?
If so, footage is required.
With what?
Ask “major leaders” their opinions on the subject.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Then show me the major muslim religious leaders condemning terrorism, suicide bombings, and such. where are these guys talking and preaching peace and understanding.
I’m a Protestant, a Lutheran to be specific. I have never seen any of my ministers calling for death, bombing abortion clinics, lynching gays or Muslims for their beliefs and such.
I do not see these leaders doing this. I saw people dancing in the streets after the trade center bombings. I didn’t see any Muslim countries stepping up to the plate and helping out.
You fellows can dance and debate all you want, but actions do speak louder than words. I will not have any respect for that religion until I see major leaders drop the nonsense and stop promoting terrorism.
Why don’t we just end with this?
That there is an extreme minority, versus the vast majority of Middle Eastern clerics, that have said as you have asked for is simply the exception that proves the rule. (With most such having to be picked from clerics outside the Middle East, or not even clerics, at that.) What the vast majority chooses, and they choose just as you say, is what has to carry the weight.
As well as the actions of course.
What you said proves the point completely regardless of the attempted distractions and pitiful evasions of the Koolaid drinker and nutcase we have had to deal with here.
(Such as the inevitable, diarrhea-like demands of my quoting a verse to prove the above that, instead of recognition and admission of the very real problems, will inevitably follow. Sorry, I’m not interested further in such. Enough has been said, the matters are thoroughly covered.)[/quote]
True. I like your posts and you put a lot of effort and thought into them for sure. I just look at it simply. Who was the driving force for women and increased societal rights. Christianity. Abolishing slavery. Christians.
Some necessary social reforms, such as equal rights for blacks and rights in this country. Christians. Criticize them all you want, but get back to me when some Methodists fly some planes into that hotel in Dubai, some Roman Catholics blow up a mosque, and some crazy Lutheran straps a bomb to himself and blows himself up in a crowded market in a Muslim country.
And when that happens I will condemn it. Util I see that stuff happen I won’t think it’s fair that we as Christians are also causing all this violence. Our women don’t wear masks and have the same rights as men, we are the most tolerant religion in comparison to the Muslim faith and have more respect for basic human rights.
Almost every form of terrorism against the USA in the last thirty years has been perpetrated by fundamental Islam terrorists of the age of 17-45. There have been no white 85 year old grandmothers who have blown up planes or building. No sunday school teachers. No white women church council members.
Just 17-45 year old male jackasses who said allah said so.
[quote]lixy wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Then show me the major muslim religious leaders condemning terrorism, suicide bombings, and such.
I don’t have to show you anything. And I certainly won’t be the one to tell you how “terrorism” is a very broad term.
If you’re stupid enough to believe “major muslim religious leaders” are not condemning innocent deaths, it’s not exactly my problem. Blame your lazy ass, narrow mind, homogenized social circle and whatever media’s dispensing “The Truth” to you.
I’m a Protestant, a Lutheran to be specific. I have never seen any of my ministers calling for death, bombing abortion clinics, lynching gays or Muslims for their beliefs and such.
And if they did, they’d be in jail.
What’s your point?
I saw people dancing in the streets after the trade center bombings.
“Bombings”? When? 1993?
If so, footage is required.
I didn’t see any Muslim countries stepping up to the plate and helping out.
With what?
I will not have any respect for that religion until I see major leaders drop the nonsense and stop promoting terrorism.
Ask “major leaders” their opinions on the subject.
Off you go![/quote]
You are really that delusional and stupid. Post 9/11 world trade center there was plenty of footage showing people celebrating in Muslim countries. Right after that our leaders including the President were quick to tell us how muslims were peaceful people blah, blah, blah. We were attacked and told to behave.
I have never seen one of these4 clerics speak up with tolerance to other religions. show me were major muslim clerics have decried violence.
Footage asshole. Again, weren’t you on a self imposed ban for being a dumbass?
[quote]tom63 wrote:
You are really that delusional and stupid. Post 9/11 world trade center there was plenty of footage showing people celebrating in Muslim countries. [/quote]
9/11 was no “bombing”.
Anyway, there was footage from the Occupied Territories. Nothing more, nothing less. Those folks were offered cake to cheer on camera.
Besides, much of the Israeli arsenal is subsidized by American taxpayer money. And if they did in fact cheer, they had a good reason which has nothing to do with religion. Indeed, a substantial portion of people who died on 9/11 were Muslims.
What about the carnage in Iraq? Is that your idea of “behave”?
How about you show me “were major muslim clerics have” not spoken out against flying planes into buildings?
[quote]tom63 wrote:
I will not have any respect for that religion until I see major leaders drop the nonsense and stop promoting terrorism.[/quote]
It amazes me that people even consider this argument valid.
Have you talked to any “major leaders” of Islam? Who do you consider to be a “major leader” of Islam?
Hey I know, let’s set down a list for this thread. That way we avoid this confusion. Let’s do it it for all religions. I’d certainly like to see all these “major leaders” and read their opinions.
[quote]tom63 wrote:
I will not have any respect for that religion until I see major leaders drop the nonsense and stop promoting terrorism.[/quote]
It amazes me that people even consider this argument valid.
Have you talked to any “major leaders” of Islam? Who do you consider to be a “major leader” of Islam?
Hey I know, let’s set down a list for this thread. That way we avoid this confusion. Let’s do it it for all religions. I’d certainly like to see all these “major leaders” and read their opinions.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
I will not have any respect for that religion until I see major leaders drop the nonsense and stop promoting terrorism.
It amazes me that people even consider this argument valid.
Have you talked to any “major leaders” of Islam? Who do you consider to be a “major leader” of Islam?
Hey I know, let’s set down a list for this thread. That way we avoid this confusion. Let’s do it it for all religions. I’d certainly like to see all these “major leaders” and read their opinions.[/quote]
An equivalent leader as the President of the USA. The Pope, a major Bishop. I recal many of these men telling us as USA citizens to not condemn all Muslims for the acts of few.
Find an equivalent in Iran, Iraq, a cleric or anyone else on record decrying the loss of innocent life, suicide bombings and such. I’ve never seen or heard of a minister or priest preach nuke their ass and take the gas from the pulpit.
I’ve seen it on the Muslim side, but I also hear a lot of silence in regards to such acts against Christians or Infidels as we are called. When I see a serious attempt to talk out against the violence of these various groups, I’ll consider them a viable religion as opposed to a new form of political control such as Nazism.
The problem is that a lot of you just wait to hear about Muslims denouncing the acts. Go ask a few what they think. I mean actually walk up to a few you know and ask.
All of you seem to base your “they don’t speak out against it” mantra on what’s reported on the news or for some reason on Christian websites.
Also, who says the Pope speaks for all Christians? I thought he spoke for all Catholics. Why is the President even mentioned? He is not a religious spokesperson.
That there is an extreme minority, versus the vast majority of Middle Eastern clerics, that have said as you have asked for is simply the exception that proves the rule. (With most such having to be picked from clerics outside the Middle East, or not even clerics, at that.) What the vast majority chooses, and they choose just as you say, is what has to carry the weight.
As well as the actions of course.
What you said proves the point completely regardless of the attempted distractions and pitiful evasions of the Koolaid drinker and nutcase we have had to deal with here.
(Such as the inevitable, diarrhea-like demands of my quoting a verse to prove the above that, instead of recognition and admission of the very real problems, will inevitably follow. Sorry, I’m not interested further in such. Enough has been said, the matters are thoroughly covered.)[/quote]
Becayse it’s a lie. You lie, you’re lazy, racist and defend it all with garbage rhetoric.
When asked to man up and give proof you flee off into your self taught world of make believe.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Why all the quotes?
I thought all the English translations of the Koran were wrong.
Makes me wonder that the above quotes REALLY say in Arabic. [/quote]
I can assure you they are relevant to the accusation above. If you can read Arabic or have access to an Arabic speaking scholar, take the verses and ask for yourself.
Darn it, that would be too much work wouldn’t it. You don’t really want to know that. What you want is to continue beating your chest on the forum and hope we notice.
Ironic though your alias and avatar. From being uncivilized barbarians and oppressors the mongols were a changed people when they met the Muslims. From destroying villages and communities they rebuilt them to their previous glory and many converted.
Must of been because Muslims love violence and killing… stop… brain hurts… stop.
[quote] Sifu wrote:
Now you are contradicting yourself. All along you have been saying that Islam must be taught by a qualified teacher because it’s a science that is too complicated to be self taught. Now you are saying it is sensible concepts. If it is sensible would it not be readily understood?[/quote]
Deary me! Let me break it down for you so that you can follow. Seems you’re purposely being obtuse or you just don’t get it.
Islam can be practiced by anyone. Anyone that is willing to participate in it’s basic tenet. The most basic one is ingrained in it’s name, that is, submission and servitude. The highest and most noble trait being servitude to God.
The other meaning of the word Islam comes from the word Salam which means peace. Wow, look at that, in two or three sentences you’ve learnt that one word has multiple meanings.
These are the central most tenets of the faith. There are five pillars of the faith which if the first one alone is heartfelt believed and practiced makes one a Muslim. The others are sins not to perform without excuses but don’t make one a non muslim according to most scholars. There is differing opinion on this though within the schools of thought.
However, should one DENY any of the 5 as being paramount and part and parcel part of the package, then this by default makes one a disbeliever or apostate.
The first is belief in one God, without partners and belief in Muhammad as his last and final Messenger and Prophet. This also has the precondition that one believes in all the previous Prophets such as Jesus, Moses, Abraham, Lot, Jacob, Solomon, David, Noah, Adam and so on. We believe, love, cherish and defend their honour just as we would Muhammad, peace be upon them all. We do not believe they were sons of God, God incarnate or have any influence over God. This is where Christianity and Islam differ but that is another topic.
Sheesh, I can’t believe I have to break things down so much for you to understand.
Anyway.
The other four pillars are Prayer 5 times a day, fasting the lunar month of Ramadan, paying the charity tax called Zakat and if one is able to perform at least one pilgrimage to the holy city of Mecca.
If one has an open heart towards Islam and has truly submitted their will to servitude towards God, then this and many other things they will learn are easy and simple concepts. There will always be areas of confusion as to the methods to go about things, for example the Quran implores believers to pray the five daily prayers. Ok, so Tom, Dick and Hamza all believe but they draw a raised brow as to how to pray. But search as you may, you won’t find a single verse stating the methods on how to pray. Tom, Dick and Hamza have all pulled short straws it may seem. All that eagerness to pray and be good Muslims yet no where in the Quran can they find how to pray. So they rush to the local Imam, Shaykh or even slightly more learned person and they have an innocent chuckle as they are informed that their is also the Sunnah (not Surrah, Sifu) to follow.
But what is the Sunnah? The Sunnah is the recorded collection of actions of Muhammad. This is recorded in what we call hadith. Hadith is just the Arabic word for “what someone says or does” but in colloquial Muslim circles refers to the sayings and actions of Muhammad more specifically.
The whole of prayer, it’s prerequisites, conditions, pillars, formalities, informalities, acceptances and etiquette are detailed in hadith. Hadith books being huge voluminous recordings of minute details of the whole of the Prophets 23 years of Prophecy are oceans of literature to say the least.
Coupled with the fact that Arabic is a massively diverse and detailed language, scholars upon scholars have taken to these books to detail authenticity of various hadiths and the inauthenticity of others.
Therefore they have arrived at what is currently accepted as the 6 hadith sahih books. Sahih merely means truthful and 6 because there were 6 major scholars who went to excruciating lengths to arrive at the unequivocal truthfulness of the hadiths contained in their books. Sahih Bukhari (name of scholar) as an example being the largest.
Well, in essence these books are still just recordings many a lay person would still come to some confusion as to their intended meaning. Hence the four schools of thought which you already know about who broke down these books into jurisprudential divisions that concern a Muslim and their practises. Usually in all these books, you will find an introductory section detailing articles of belief and faith and things that cause one to blaspheme and things that don’t contravene the creed. In actual fact their are two major schools of creed, the Maturidi and the Ash’ari. These relate to matters of belief and what makes one a Muslim and what doesn’t.
Back to the schools of jurisprudence (fiqh). The second chapters are usually about purification (physical) which is a precondition for many rituals such as prayer, reciting/handling Quran, entering a mosque, pilgrimage and more.
Next you will find a break down on the methods of prayer, it’s conditions and so on.
The fiqh books will usually continue on to the other pillars and other topics such as financial transactions, the jurisprudence of marriage and divorce and many more topics.
As you can see, a Muslim’s life is very involved. This is why cliche’s are repeated that being a Muslim is a way of life, not just a past time affiliation.
This is why Muslims are seemingly passionate about religon. They live their every movement through the teachings and doctrine.
Teachings and doctrine that are the most detailed in the world today and have been since their inception.
You probably knew much of above and perhaps some of it was merely just reminding you on things you already knew but back to your original accusation, I did NOT contradict myself at all.
It is sensible for those that have a sincere devotion to it. If you have no interest in Islam, why would it seem sensible at all no matter how much I lambaste you with information? You have preconceived ideas and beliefs and this would halt you from seeing past them and into what someone who is Muslim is trying to explain to you.
Here you are, a non Muslim attempting to tell a Muslim what their religon is. Can you not see the absurdity in that?
Rather than asking, you’re attacking. Rather than learning, you’re slinging mud and creeping through crevices in attempt to deconstruct and then misconstrue what I say.
To the external viewer, training in a gym is easy. Jump on a treadmill, push that machine this way, pull that machine that way, lift those heavy things that way… but voila no results!
To others though they look and get freaked out. Will I hurt myself they ask? How do I use that? What will this do? What are the benefits of using this machine over that? Why should I do this exercise instead of the other one?
And then again for the truly curious mind who wants perfect understanding they will attend seminars, lectures and read and in the end ask experts to clarify their positions or learn from experts. They may never put an iota of their knowledge to practical use but they at least went about it the right way to learn about something.
Others will do the above and then commit themselves to the program.
Then you have all those in between all of the above categories.
If you think religon is free of this then your deluded. Like the examples above the practitioners of Islam are many types but it is common ground that a layperson does not go out on interpretive missions trying to come to their own conclusions. If they don’t know, they ask. What is commanded of them and obligatory are simple things. It’s very easy to practice the five pillars but one should know how. Should they wish to delve more, then serious study needs to take place, especially if they wish to interpret the Quran on their own or any parts of the religon that they think is confusing.
As you can imagine, if this rule applies to it’s followers, you can see how insane it sounds for non Muslims to prance around thinking that the religon is a Tom Sawyer book they can read and arrive at their grand understanding.
One word in the Quran, for example “Hata” has over 15 meanings. Up to, including, until, as well and all mean different things depending on the context and preceding words/verses. Dangerous territory even for a learned Arabic reading and writing person.
There’s no way on earth you or anyone else will get away scott free thinking they have arrived at grand and holy conclusions from passage skimming and internet quotes.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Koran, Hadith, Surrah, It’s all part of a whole. Isn’t it? From what I have read of them Mohammad and his gang did a whole lot of killing. If Mohammad did it, it must be okay. Right?
If killing for Islam isn’t part of the religion why do the four main schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that the penalty for apostasy should be execution? Are you saying that respected scholars of Islamic law are wrong, too?[/quote]
it’s very easy to jump to such simpleton conclusions when you take a view that is marginalized and narrow. You’ve zeroed in on a concept and tried to use it as ammunition to prove your point.
That’s laziness and ignorance to say the least.
Fact is, the three major religons, Judaism, Christianity and Islam all have sentencing and penalties for apostasy. Again Islam details this subject tremendously and treats it very seriously. Perhaps you’re unaware or oblivious to the implications of social and moral decay of free roaming “apostates” spreading their message and what it does to societies?
Maybe the words Treason, espionage, sedition, traitor, defection will bring a closer meaning to you.
Perhaps the shift from religious affiliation to separatism from Church and state has allowed for secular views to sweep the minds of the masses world wide as to the seriousness of the above, all of which international countries stipulate life imprisonment but the US has the flimsiest laws of all countries still allowing for fine print and thus officiating their ability to over-ride laws and dish out punishment they see fit for the above crimes, ie they can still impose the death penalty for treasonous acts.
You must live in an idealistic bubble if you think hoorah hoorah let all live and run a muck freely without consequence.
Again, the topic of apostasy is treated with a backward step by most scholars so that they don’t error in it’s judgment.
The current crop of POLITICAL BS govts available use the religon as a backdrop justification for their insane laws. Countries like Saudi are insanely extreme with governance laws of it’s people yet the royal elite are allowed outrageous and despicably contradictory leeway to indulge in their largely forbidden and Islamically condemned acts. If you think you have a beef with such behavior and laws then take a ticket because Internally, the moderate and sane Muslims have been fighting against this for over a thousand years.
A little more knowledge and insight into the History of Islam and the influence of the Kharijites, Mu’tazilites all the way until the recent 200 year old resurrection through the Saudi-Wahabi team effort is needed before you continue to pass off judgment.
[quote] Sifu wrote:
Here is what I meant by rationalization.
In psychology and logic, rationalization is the process of constructing a logical justification for a belief, decision, action or lack thereof that was originally arrived at through a different mental process. It is a defense mechanism in which unacceptable behaviors or feelings are explained in a rational or logical manner; this avoids the true explanation of the behavior or feeling in question.[1][2]
This process can be in a range from fully conscious (e.g. to present an external defense against ridicule from others) to mostly subconscious (e.g. to create a block against internal feelings of guilt).
Rationalization is one of the defense mechanisms proposed by Sigmund Freud, which were later developed further by his daughter Anna Freud.
According to the DSM-IV rationalization occurs “when the individual deals with emotional conflict or internal or external stressors by concealing the true motivations for his or her own thoughts, actions, or feelings through the elaboration of reassuring or self serving but incorrect explanations.”
[/quote]
Bad example sorry. As a personal (read: nothing to do with religion) belief I don’t believe in the spoof and quackery of psychology or psychiatry and most certainly not the VOTED upon (do your research) supposed diseases/illnesses it proposes in the DSM.
[quote] Sifu wrote:
I do realize that not all Muslims behave like Mohammad did and instead have some decency. But there are also a lot of Muslims who do act like Mohammad did, they are why we are having the problems we are having now. [/quote]
Any credibility you had just flew out the window and I will no longer respond to anything you write.
You’re an imbecile to say the least to have to resort to racist and insulting attacks on a highly respected religious figure.
This just shows what little you know and how you clutch at straws in an attempt to sound as if you know something but when all else fails you try to get a response out of me by insulting a revered figure.
This is something Muslims do not do and it is a sin and stated throughout the Quran that we are forbidden from insulting other religons. Yes, I know your little mind will never comprehend that irrespective of how many verses are accepted.
You should feel proud that you don’t own your mind but it is rather trendily fashioned by media. Don’t even try to defend yourself or your statement. If that idea of wound and heal was meant to come across as empathetic you failed miserably. Any success their is today by Muslims is because of following Muhammad, not because of ignoring him. Rather the terrible state we’re in is because of negligence of his message and God’s book.
Has you been only a smidgen more educated you would have known that according to many non partial scholars and renown researchers, the greatness of the Man Muhammad and his message is unsurpassed.
I realize now that I’m dealing with a bunch of know it all’s infatuated with seeing their screen names. I’ve sincerely tried to answer every insult an accusation you’ve had towards Islam and all you do is find another argument to bring up or work on another side issue to demonize Islam.
Keep going with your diatribe. Where it matters in the real world, Islam is still on the rise and has one of the highest conversion rates in the world and at times was the Highest. In your very own country it is one of the if not the fastest growing religon by way of conversions. Post Sept 11 the rates went through the roof and printing companies where in despair trying to provide ample stocks for requests for the Quran and religious texts
But of course I anticipate your rebuttal and excuses as to why people are choosing to convert.
Those statistics and videos must be fudged or there must be a big bad boogey man sitting around with a sword threatening people to convert or else. Yep… I see what you’re saying now.
Anyway, this will be the last time I reply to you due to your flagrant ignorance and disrespect.
Ironic though your alias and avatar. From being uncivilized barbarians and oppressors the mongols were a changed people when they met the Muslims. From destroying villages and communities they rebuilt them to their previous glory and many converted.
Must of been because Muslims love violence and killing… stop… brain hurts… stop.
[/quote]
You need to re-read your history. The ones who embrased Buddhism became peaceful.
The ones who embraced Islam became, well, Timurids, Mughuls.
Anyway my question still stands. Is the English translation of the Koran correct or not. In one post you said it is incorrect. In another, you say it is correct. Is it just correct when it suits you? How does this work?
Sorry to say guys… …that you’re way off track… This case is not about race or politics… …its all about controlling the Hash-market in Denmark - and especially Copenhagen…
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
humble wrote:
Anyway, this will be the last time I reply to you due to your flagrant ignorance and disrespect.
ignored again?[/quote]
Yes ignored, I won’t be replying to any of his gibberish.
As for history, you’re mistaken. It was the violent Mongol Shamanism and Buddhism of the Khans that terrorized the Muslim world and all this eventually withered away with each successor after Abaqas fall.
[quote]MichaelAndersen wrote:
Sorry to say guys… …that you’re way off track… This case is not about race or politics… …its all about controlling the Hash-market in Denmark - and especially Copenhagen…
[/quote]
This is true
But hey, any excuse to have target practice against Muslims.
[quote]MichaelAndersen wrote:
Sorry to say guys… …that you’re way off track… This case is not about race or politics… …its all about controlling the Hash-market in Denmark - and especially Copenhagen…
[/quote]
Yep you are right, disappointing to see the Hells Angels turn into just another pack of drug dealing scumbags.
[quote]humble wrote:
MichaelAndersen wrote:
Sorry to say guys… …that you’re way off track… This case is not about race or politics… …its all about controlling the Hash-market in Denmark - and especially Copenhagen…
This is true
But hey, any excuse to have target practice against Muslims.
[/quote]
Sometimes its like shooting ducks at the fair, take for instance the Mufti in NSW, you know the wanker who is widely reported, not a good look for any religion, thats what the general public here in Oz perceives Muslims to be like. It seems there is a large segement of Muslims who go MIA when wankers like him mouth off.
