The lady of heaven movie and Sunni protests

[danieldemol]

The movie sounds like it will be another boring hagiography of Ali and Muhammad's family coupled with polemic against Sunni Muslims based on largely non-historical matter.

If Morroco's society was an open one it would permit alternative views of what honestly seems to me to be non-historical narrative. I guess what I'm saying here is that what the "Supreme Ulema council" of Morroco and others are mostly upset by (aside from it's polemical aspect) is the presentation of an alternative dogmatic narrative to their own dogmatic narrative which they try to assert as being "established facts in Islamic history".

In my opinion.

 

[England my lionheart]

Some people are on a mission to destroy the reputation of a said religion or a said religious figure. When it is obvious what they are up to - they should be discouraged but of course in a civilized way. Problem is - in many cases negative publicity makes them and their controversial deed even more famous and subsequently the problem only skyrockets.
Every religion have some biased critics who (for whatever personal reason) make it a mission in their life to work against that said religion in every possible way they can. Maybe they feel threatened by that religion or maybe they do it because there is money to be made!
The writer of this movie is a controversial figure. Anyone attempting to undertake writing and producing a movie based an historical and religious incident should have the common sense to verify details by consulting qualified historians. Did he do that? If not - then his motives are clear.

Some people are on a mission to destroy the reputation of a said religion or a said religious figure. When it is obvious what they are up to - they should be discouraged but of course in a civilized way. Problem is - in many cases negative publicity makes them and their controversial deed even more famous and subsequently the problem only skyrockets.


This movie is rated 15 and over under the heading action/drama so passed as suitable to watch,if it wasn’t it would not be screened,the British board of film classification passed it so it’s not up to a religious group to decide what we can watch or not.

The UK Muslim 5pillars website branded it “pure, unadulterated sectarian filth”,this website is edited by Roshan Muhammed Salih, who has expressed support for the Taliban and the amputation of hands for theft,he too has a right to express his discusting views but we should never bow to a mob and especially not one with a violent track record.

 

[BrightShadow]

I don't know what you did there with the quote. You are making it look like I said something that is clearly your comments. Is it a misquote or a response?
Let me try to separate your statement and respond....

This movie is rated 15 and over under the heading action/drama so passed as suitable to watch,if it wasn’t it would not be screened,the British board of film classification passed it so it’s not up to a religious group to decide what we can watch or not.

I don't know what criteria the British board of film uses to verify validity of a claim that the film is indeed based on a historical and religious incident!
If someone depicts wrong conclusion on the holocaust and makes a movie showing that the Jews were killing Nazis - will your British board of film pass it as suitable to watch?

The UK Muslim 5pillars website branded it “pure, unadulterated sectarian filth”,this website is edited by Roshan Muhammed Salih, who has expressed support for the Taliban and the amputation of hands for theft,he too has a right to express his discusting views but we should never bow to a mob and especially not one with a violent track record.

Why is that when trying to make a point - you have to find the worse example to show that because this individual supported this cause - we shouldn't get behind him?
Many sincere people are also objecting! Why not show good examples of the protest? People have a right to protest. But I agree no one should cross the line and get violent. People's sentiments has nothing to do with their religious teachings. We have to learn to separate that.

If the movie is classified as fictitious and the characters are not mentioned with their historical real names - then I have no issue with the film. But if you are trying to make Hitler into a holy man like Pope - then I have a problem with that movie!

N.B. I standby with what else I wrote in my post #39 in the earlier part of this thread.

 

[England my lionheart]

I don't know what you did there with the quote. You are making it look like I said something that is clearly your comments. Is it a misquote or a response?
Let me try to separate your statement and respond....



I don't know what criteria the British board of film uses to verify validity of a claim that the film is indeed based on a historical and religious incident!
If someone depicts wrong conclusion on the holocaust and makes a movie showing that the Jews were killing Nazis - will your British board of film pass it as suitable to watch?




Why is that when trying to make a point - you have to find the worse example to show that because this individual supported this cause - we shouldn't get behind him?
Many sincere people are also objecting! Why not show good examples of the protest? People have a right to protest. But I agree no one should cross the line and get violent. People's sentiments has nothing to do with their religious teachings. We have to learn to separate that.

If the movie is classified as fictitious and the characters are not mentioned with their historical real names - then I have no issue with the film. But if you are trying to make Hitler into a holy man like Pope - then I have a problem with that movie!

N.B. I standby with what else I wrote in my post #39 in the earlier part of this thread.

My bad,put it down to clumsy fingers and my phone.

Like I said it’s up to the British board to decide,that’s what they are for,there are many historical movies that aren’t correct in portraying historical figures without any demonstrations.

The example I gave was fair and true and just shows the hypocrisy of some people,there is very little in the way of blasphemy laws here,no laws were broken and regardless of it being historically correct or not it has been passed 15 and over so there should be no problem should there?.

 

[stevecanuck]

I found this: Islam Means Peace? A brief etymological reflection - Arab Baptist Theological Seminary (ABTS)

From the website:

Let us be clear. The etymological (linguistic) root of the word ‘Islam’ is not ‘salam’ (peace). It is the verb ‘salima,’ which means to find security, safety, or even a deeper sense of wellbeing. The word ‘salam’ is derived from that same verb salima, just like the word ‘Islam’ is derived from it. But in the case of ‘Islam,’ it is the so-called Form IV of the verb, aslama, from which it derives more directly. So in a sense, Islam is salam’s sibling, rather than its child. One child, Salam, goes on to express meanings of peace, wellbeing, good neighborliness and hospitality. Whereas the other child, Islam, moves on to generate derivatives of power, such as submission and surrender, with the purpose of finding safety and security. They are certainly close linguistic relatives, they influence each other mutually, but they cannot simply be merged.

But.......but.......CUT AND PASTE!!!!!!!!!!



(P.S.) My wife and I are on a massive road trip across Canada and back through the northern states. My participation in this forum will be spotty for the next 2 1/2 months.

 

[stvdv]

Also, where in the Qur'an is the Islam called "The religion of Peace"? That's also kind of surprising really.

Maybe I am ignorant on that as well

Yes, you are

 

[Link]

(P.S.) My wife and I are on a massive road trip across Canada and back through the northern states. My participation in this forum will be spotty for the next 2 1/2 months.

Safety and peace in your travels, and have a good trip!

 

[firedragon]

Yes, you are

But if you are such a master, why not provide some evidence as I asked rather than saying "yes you are" as if that is some kind of divine revelation?

 

[stvdv]

But if you are such a master, why not provide some evidence as I asked rather than saying "yes you are" as if that is some kind of divine revelation?

But if you are such a master,

Better said would be...I had "such a Master".....who said "Islam is the Religion of Peace"....which makes really sense if one contemplates on the meaning of Islam. I need not be "such a master" to see that. I am sure you will see that too, and it does not even require some divine insights, just a little reading between words and/or common sense.

 

[BrightShadow]

My bad,put it down to clumsy fingers and my phone.

Like I said it’s up to the British board to decide,that’s what they are for,there are many historical movies that aren’t correct in portraying historical figures without any demonstrations.

The example I gave was fair and true and just shows the hypocrisy of some people,there is very little in the way of blasphemy laws here,no laws were broken and regardless of it being historically correct or not it has been passed 15 and over so there should be no problem should there?.

If someone makes a documentary and put it on Youtube or other social media regarding your loved ones (your daughter, wife or mother) and makes them look vulgar or evil to the world - would you then protest?
It is easy to say no one should have a problem with this - when you don't feel any attachment to this religion or the historical personalities in question. Bring the issue to your personal level and see if it bothers you! I agree you may not protest like them but you will do whatever allowed by the law to take down that clip from the social media in question.
These people have a right to protest. They feel very closely attached to the matters surrounding their religion and consider it a matter of honor to defend. I agree that they should never be violent!

This is not due to the teaching of their religion. This is due to their sentiments. They need to realize that these protests are counter productive!

 

[firedragon]

I found this: Islam Means Peace? A brief etymological reflection - Arab Baptist Theological Seminary (ABTS)

From the website:

Let us be clear. The etymological (linguistic) root of the word ‘Islam’ is not ‘salam’ (peace). It is the verb ‘salima,’ which means to find security, safety, or even a deeper sense of wellbeing. The word ‘salam’ is derived from that same verb salima, just like the word ‘Islam’ is derived from it. But in the case of ‘Islam,’ it is the so-called Form IV of the verb, aslama, from which it derives more directly. So in a sense, Islam is salam’s sibling, rather than its child. One child, Salam, goes on to express meanings of peace, wellbeing, good neighborliness and hospitality. Whereas the other child, Islam, moves on to generate derivatives of power, such as submission and surrender, with the purpose of finding safety and security. They are certainly close linguistic relatives, they influence each other mutually, but they cannot simply be merged.

But.......but.......CUT AND PASTE!!!!!!!!!!



(P.S.) My wife and I are on a massive road trip across Canada and back through the northern states. My participation in this forum will be spotty for the next 2 1/2 months.

Yea. A Baptist website with such basic information on Arabic is a great source for an irrelevant topic in which you cannot respond to a single point objectively. But.....but.....CUT AND PASTE!!!!!

 

[firedragon]

Better said would be...I had "such a Master".....who said "Islam is the Religion of Peace"....which makes really sense if one contemplates on the meaning of Islam. I need not be "such a master" to see that. I am sure you will see that too, and it does not even require some divine insights, just a little reading between words and/or common sense.

But you didn't respond to anything I asked. Now I think you don't have a choice but to respond with irrelevance. Let me cut and paste what I asked so that it reminds you. Try and respond directly. Thanks. If you don't know or you were wrong or you blindly assumed things, just admit it. There is nothing wrong in doing that.

That's surprising. Where did they show violent behaviour? I am really ignorant on that so do you have any protest where they were violent?

Also, where in the Qur'an is the Islam called "The religion of Peace"? That's also kind of surprising really. Maybe I am ignorant on that as well so please advice on that.

 

[stvdv]

But if you are such a master, why not provide some evidence as I asked rather than saying "yes you are" as if that is some kind of divine revelation?

why not provide some evidence

I don't provide evidence when people demand evidence, why should I if I speak the truth?

Babies need to be pampered, grown ups can figure it out themselves. That's the number one lesson my Master taught me.

 

[firedragon]

I don't provide evidence when people demand evidence, why should I if I speak the truth?

Babies need to be pampered, grown ups can figure it out themselves. That's the number one lesson my Master taught me.

Excellent. Then let me tell you some things either you are not aware of, or/and some things you have not substantiated yet. I don't know if your master taught you to claim something about some protestors being violent but when asked "when and where" you don't have much to say but respond with some irrelevant rhetoric. Nevermind, that "they were violent" is something I cant tell you theoretically because it was your personal claim about whats happening on the ground so it is your burden of proof and if you don't have proof of that it was just your bias. But it could be true. Could be. But I don't make such conjecture without knowing the ground activity since that would truly demonise people. It's a very violent thing to do to demonise people with out any grounding.

About your theological claim that Islam is the religion of peace, nowhere in the Qur'an does it say Islam is the religion of peace. First, Islam calls itself a dheen. Many translate it as religion because people are used to that word and jump up and down if it was otherwise, but the real linguistic meaning is "system" or "way and manner that includes a method" to explain it.

Nowhere in the Qur'an does it say "Islam is the religion of peace". Islam is many things in the Qur'an.

 

[stvdv]

Nowhere in the Qur'an does it say "Islam is the religion of peace". Islam is many things in the Qur'an.

I never said "the Koran said so"

 

[stvdv]

Excellent. Then let me tell you some things either you are not aware of, or/and some things you have not substantiated yet. I don't know if your master taught you to claim something about some protestors being violent but when asked "when and where" you don't have much to say but respond with some irrelevant rhetoric. Nevermind, that "they were violent" is something I cant tell you theoretically because it was your personal claim about whats happening on the ground so it is your burden of proof and if you don't have proof of that it was just your bias

False

 

[firedragon]

I don't provide evidence when people demand evidence, why should I if I speak the truth?

So you are saying the Muslim were violent. I don't know if its true, so I asked you to show some proof.

You are saying "I speak the truth because I speak the truth" and that's your answer. I think you just made conjecture.

But I am dropping that particular conversation because your answer is "It's true because I speak the truth".

Have a good day.

 

[firedragon]

I never said "the Koran said so"

Yeah. So, hearsay?

 

[firedragon]

False

A word called "False" is not some evidence.

 

[stvdv]

So you are saying the Muslim were violent

I never said that, you might have interpreted it that way.