Islam is unable to relate to the diverse contemporary cultures

[Augustus]

I consider the secular historical academics to be best sources to study history critically without a religious agenda.

Strange, in a number of other threads you have repeatedly dismissed a wide range of secular academics out of hand when they made arguments that went against your ideological prejudices.

 

[shunyadragon]

Strange, in a number of other threads you have repeatedly dismissed a wide range of secular academics out of hand when they made arguments that went against your ideological prejudices.

Not true, it was your selective interpretation of historical references to justify your religious agenda. I did not disgree with your references, just your misuse of them.

 

[shunyadragon]

I asked what do you mean by 'war in the name of religion so we'd get clarily to your argument However, the war spoken of in the Quran is not simply about religion, but about oppression. So why would it not be allowed?

Actually the quotes are too open ended to be interpreted as advocating 'war in the name of religion,' that reflects the actual facts of history.

 

[Remté]

Actually the quotes are too open ended to be interpreted as advocating 'war in the name of religion,' that reflects the actual facts of history.

You lost me.

 

[Augustus]

Not true, it was your selective interpretation of historical references to justify your religious agenda. I did not disgree with your references, just your misuse of them.

"Misused" = used perfectly accurately and in context to make a directly relevant argument which contradicted your deeply held prejudices

Seriously though, why pretend you actually are interested in secular academic history on such issues when you quite obviously are not?

You never actually refer to any directly, and when other people do you simply dismiss it out of hand with an ad hom (as you are doing again now), post some low quality web resource/blog that you think is of equal merit to peer-reviewed scholarship, or sometimes, very bizarrely, point blanc refuse to acknowledge that it says what it says (even when said words are visible on the screen).

I've seen few people here who are more consistently contemptuous of academic critical-historical scholarship.

 

[shunyadragon]

"Misused" = used perfectly accurately and in context to make a directly relevant argument which contradicted your deeply held prejudices

Seriously though, why pretend you actually are interested in secular academic history on such issues when you quite obviously are not?

You never actually refer to any directly, and when other people do you simply dismiss it out of hand with an ad hom (as you are doing again now), post some low quality web resource/blog that you think is of equal merit to peer-reviewed scholarship, or sometimes, very bizarrely, point blanc refuse to acknowledge that it says what it says (even when said words are visible on the screen).

I've seen few people here who are more consistently contemptuous of academic critical-historical scholarship.

Look in the mirror, your religious agenda over shadows how you interpreted your references and ignored mine.

 

[Shad]

Look in the mirror, your religious agenda over shadows how you interpreted your references and ignored mine.

Augustus isn't religious and one of the few people on the forum that the assertions of having a religious agenda falls flat.

 

[shunyadragon]

Augustus isn't religious and one of the few people on the forum that the assertions of having a religious agenda falls flat.

He made first person statement for the existence of God, and he made a long drawn out contorted argument that Christianity was the source of democracy, which is the same blueprint argument used by the churches..

 

[Augustus]

He made first person statement for the existence of God,

I know you are very proud of your Cluedo Jnr sleuthing to uncover a devious Christian apologist surreptitiously corrupting RF, but let's see if you can finally unpack the riddle this time... I've annotated it in brackets to make it easier for you as you do often struggle with reading comprehension.

"What you do notice though [in the late Middle Ages] is the genesis of ideas [among Christian thinkers] such as a common humanity, and rights that derive from us all being God's creation."

and he made a long drawn out contorted argument that Christianity was the source of democracy, which is the same blueprint argument used by the churches..

Back to the old strawman that has been corrected at least 10 times in this thread by multiple people.

The discussion was the influence of Christianity on the development of liberalism in Europe and it was a discussion backed up with many academic sources (which you dismissed out of hand). There were also verbatim quotes whereby these historical figures specifically acknowledged the influence of Christian thought on their philosophy (which you dismissed out of hand).

Yet now you pretend you have a great interest in and respect for academic history and value that which it tells us. Hmmm...

 

[shunyadragon]

I know you are very proud of your Cluedo Jnr sleuthing to uncover a devious Christian apologist surreptitiously corrupting RF, but let's see if you can finally unpack the riddle this time... I've annotated it in brackets to make it easier for you as you do often struggle with reading comprehension.

"What you do notice though [in the late Middle Ages] is the genesis of ideas [among Christian thinkers] such as a common humanity, and rights that derive from us all being God's creation."



Back to the old strawman that has been corrected at least 10 times in this thread by multiple people.

The discussion was the influence of Christianity on the development of liberalism in Europe and it was a discussion backed up with many academic sources (which you dismissed out of hand). There were also verbatim quotes whereby these historical figures specifically acknowledged the influence of Christian thought on their philosophy (which you dismissed out of hand).

Yet now you pretend you have a great interest in and respect for academic history and value that which it tells us. Hmmm...

You earned it by your first person statement supporting the existence of God.

The result of growing philosophical influence displacing Christian Theocracy and Theodicy. The conflict continues today

 

[Augustus]

displacing Christian Theocracy

Medieval European states were not theocracies in the first place. They were mostly feudal monarchies of some ilk.

and Theodicy.

How does 'displacing theodicy' relate to the development of liberalism?

 

[Shad]

He made first person statement for the existence of God,

No. You are misreading him

and he made a long drawn out contorted argument that Christianity was the source of democracy, which is the same blueprint argument used by the churches..

It is with modern democracy which include liberalism. I am not a Christian either. I just acknowledge history.

 

[Nakosis]

I believe that at one time Islam was a light to the world and the spiritual renewal of civilization, but no more. As time passed Islam remained cloaked in ancient tribal culture, outdated Shiria Law, failure to separate religion from the secular state, violently divided and failure to acknowledge a diverse evolving world.

Serious question, what enlightenment did Islam bring to the world.
The Muslims absorbed a lot of culture and developed a unique culture. art, music, architecture. Something every civilization did. What "spiritual" enlightenment did Islam bring to the world?

 

[shunyadragon]

Serious question, what enlightenment did Islam bring to the world.
The Muslims absorbed a lot of culture and developed a unique culture. art, music, architecture. Something every civilization did. What "spiritual" enlightenment did Islam bring to the world?

The restoration of pure Monotheism. Tolerance toward other religions was observed and taught initially. Islam contributed to the development of universities, and the scientific method.

More to follow . . .

 

[shunyadragon]

It is with modern democracy which include liberalism. I am not a Christian either. I just acknowledge history.

The origins of modern democracy, and liberalism (?}, have nothing to do with Christianity, and evolved from other philosophical and cultural influences particularly the humanist intellectual movements. Christianity was in conflict with these changes and still today resists change.

 

[Shad]

The origins of modern democracy, and liberalism (?}, have nothing to do with Christianity, and evolved from other philosophical and cultural influences particularly the humanist intellectual movements. Christianity was in conflict with these changes and still today resists change.

Humanism is based on Christianity. The Greeks believe in a nature order for humanity which flies in the face of humanism itself as per the views of slavery.

 

[shunyadragon]

Humanism is based on Christianity. The Greeks believe in a nature order for humanity which flies in the face of humanism itself as per the views of slavery.

Humanism would fly in the face per Christian views of slavery.

There is Christian humanism, and in this case it is the rise of secular humanism.

The actual humanism that evolved is from intellectual philosophical movements that questioned Christianity and the existence of the Theist God, ie Deism.

 

[Remté]

Serious question, what enlightenment did Islam bring to the world.
The Muslims absorbed a lot of culture and developed a unique culture. art, music, architecture. Something every civilization did. What "spiritual" enlightenment did Islam bring to the world?

The prophet Muhammad is said to have caused great changes to societyof that time. People began dressing so as to cover their private parts properly - more so than before anyway (not that I personally find this important from a spiritual point of view). The Quran affected on the rights of women - for a while allegedly, until some began forging false meanings out of it.

 

[Nakosis]

The prophet Muhammad is said to have caused great changes to societyof that time. People began dressing so as to cover their private parts properly - more so than before anyway (not that I personally find this important from a spiritual point of view). The Quran affected on the rights of women - for a while allegedly, until some began forging false meanings out of it.

Ok, let me put it this way, what is the point of Islam? To be obedient to God or to enlighten the individual?

If it is to enlighten the individual, how did Islam go about that?

 

[oldbadger]

...
................... Baha'is only must follow Baha'i Law, Law against all forms of slavery, and much more.

Bahais must follow the laws of the lands which they live in. In Islamic countries they follow Islamic law.

But in a Bahai World Order Bahais would make everybody follow Bahai Law. Otherwise, what's the point of Bahai Criminal Law and punishments?

For example, would non-Bahais be able to have sexual relationships outside of marriage in the Bahai World Order?