The Nature of Islam

[Trey of Diamonds]

any system built around 'crime and punishment' is going to be violent and the culture will be one where violence is acceptable because its part of the system....hence why its acceptable to slap ones wife if they misbehave

Judaism was the same in its day, people were stoned and beaten for crimes and Islam is the same today because it adopted those same 'crime and punishment' laws.

I disagree. Most pagan cultures had some form of crime and punishment process but their religions were not violent towards other religions. This was strictly an Abrahamic thing.

 

[Caladan]

IMO...

Because Islam as a religion includes politics, culture, jurisprudence, etc., all within the religion itself, it seems that all actions taken by Muslims are blamed on the religion, when it's often driven by politics (under the guise of religion).

I think this is the case plenty of times. at which point can we separate religious trends from social trends? it isn't always that easy.

 

[Pegg]

I disagree. Most pagan cultures had some form of crime and punishment process but their religions were not violent towards other religions. This was strictly an Abrahamic thing.

i wasnt thinking of how Islam interacts with those 'outside' of Islam... i was speaking in terms of what goes on 'inside' islam

my guess is that much of the violence against those outside Islam comes from politics as ssainu stated...its the same with christianity in that way. Politics is what causes war, but when violence is carried on 'within' a religion, then you have to look at the dogma and teachings of the religion itself. And the fact is that Islam uses some of the mosaic laws as part of its regulations.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

i wasnt thinking of how Islam interacts with those 'outside' of Islam... i was speaking in terms of what goes on 'inside' islam

my guess is that much of the violence against those outside Islam comes from politics as ssainu stated...its the same with christianity in that way. Politics is what causes war, but when violence is carried on 'within' a religion, then you have to look at the dogma and teachings of the religion itself. And the fact is that Islam uses some of the mosaic laws as part of its regulations.

Right, which all goes back to Abraham rather than crime and punishment in general. The religion is based on how Abraham's people specifically saw and enforced crime and punishment. The ways that crime and punishment interacted with religion in all other cultures was drastically different than in Abrahams culture.

 

[beenie]

I think this is the case plenty of times. at which point can we separate religious trends from social trends? it isn't always that easy.

It's not easy, and I don't necessarily think it's the best solution. After all, we are all cultural and have our own social norms, but it's when it harms or interfere with others that it becomes a problem. For the most part, Muslims are able to keep their values and habits to themselves and they do it quite well. It's the fringe that have the hardest time with this, and insist that others accept their ways, right or wrong. Those clashes lead to misunderstanding, and in its most extreme form, violence.

 

[Pegg]

Right, which all goes back to Abraham rather than crime and punishment in general. The religion is based on how Abraham's people specifically saw and enforced crime and punishment. The ways that crime and punishment interacted with religion in all other cultures was drastically different than in Abrahams culture.

the law of Moses (Torah) was not given to Abraham. It was given 400 years after Abraham had lived. So its not 'abrahamic' in the sense that those laws were practiced by Abraham or initiated by Abraham.

Abraham practiced a 'faith based' form of worship. His descendants practiced a 'works based' form of worship.... they were quite different.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Abraham practiced a 'faith based' form of worship. His descendants practiced a 'works based' form of worship.... they were quite different.

Sure but one beget the other. My statement was that Abraham and his culture were the source of the religion and its views on violence and the rejection of all other religions. That the faith has changed over the years is besides the point, the source is still Abraham.

 

[Pegg]

Sure but one beget the other. My statement was that Abraham and his culture were the source of the religion and its views on violence and the rejection of all other religions. That the faith has changed over the years is besides the point, the source is still Abraham.

Yes, the religion was following Abraham in the worship of the God Jehovah, but the source of the laws and works based regulations was installed by Moses, not Abraham.

Its just a little misleading to state that it is an 'Abrahamic' religion as if Abraham practiced the Mosaic law when he did not in fact practice the mosaic law.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Yes, the religion was following Abraham in the worship of the God Jehovah, but the source of the laws and works based regulations was Moses, not Abraham.

Its just a little misleading to state that it is an 'Abrahamic' religion as if Abraham practiced the Mosaic law when he did not in fact practice the mosaic law.

I never said they followed mosaic law, I said their culture had crime and punishment. Mosaic law is a product of Abrahamic faith, unless you are saying Moses wasn't Jewish. :sarcastic

 

[Iti oj]

Right, which all goes back to Abraham rather than crime and punishment in general. The religion is based on how Abraham's people specifically saw and enforced crime and punishment. The ways that crime and punishment interacted with religion in all other cultures was drastically different than in Abrahams culture.

many other cultures have tribe warfare... some had death sports and other violent entertainment. just different ways people have found to express and release violence.people as a group...

 

[Pegg]

I never said they followed mosaic law, I said their culture had crime and punishment. Mosaic law is a product of Abrahamic faith, unless you are saying Moses wasn't Jewish. :sarcastic

i dont think human societies were organized that way back in Abrahams day. In the days of the patriarchs, it was every man for himself and the patriarch governed his own family in the way that he himself saw fit.

i dont know if Abraham was the sort of patriarch who punished his family members with beatings or cut off their hands for stealing... I think it would be worth doing a bit of digging into Abrahams lifestyle. it would be interesting.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

many other cultures have tribe warfare... some had death sports and other violent entertainment. just different ways people have found to express and release violence.people as a group...

Sure, never said they didn't. What I said was that most pagan people did not fear, hate or feel jealous about other peoples Gods. Competiveness was between peoples not Gods. It was Abraham that introduced the jealous God who sought to destroy all other Gods.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

i dont think human societies were organized that way back in Abrahams day. In the days of the patriarchs, it was every man for himself and the patriarch governed his own family in the way that he himself saw fit.

i dont know if Abraham was the sort of patriarch who punished his family members with beatings or cut off their hands for stealing... I think it would be worth doing a bit of digging into Abrahams lifestyle. it would be interesting.

I haven't commented on how Abrahams culture was organised, only that it was the source of the faith. Is there something I've said that you disagree with? If so you will have to point it out because I'm not sure what you're getting at.

 

[Iti oj]

Sure, never said they didn't. What I said was that most pagan people did not fear, hate or feel jealous about other peoples Gods. Competiveness was between peoples not Gods. It was Abraham that introduced the jealous God who sought to destroy all other Gods.

i think i misconstrued your point. then i agree with this larger point. would also add that he is a voilent and angry god as well. thought his hippy buudist son was alright. and islam seems to have a fusion of the two.

 

[Pegg]

I haven't commented on how Abrahams culture was organised, only that it was the source of the faith. Is there something I've said that you disagree with? If so you will have to point it out because I'm not sure what you're getting at.

the only thing i disagree with is calling Islam an 'abrahamic' religion as if Abraham was the one who instituted the laws adopted by Islam

if anything, it is more accurate to call Islam a 'mosaic' religion because Islam follows parts of the Mosaic law. Im not saying you are wrong, i'm really saying that its a 'misconception' that Abraham is the source of the culture that developed from the Torah. He's not. Moses is.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

the only thing i disagree with is calling Islam an 'abrahamic' religion as if Abraham was the one who instituted the laws adopted by Islam

if anything, it is more accurate to call Islam a 'mosaic' religion because Islam follows parts of the Mosaic law. Im not saying you are wrong, i'm really saying that its a 'misconception' that Abraham is the source of the culture that developed from the Torah. He's not. Moses is.

Hmmm, sounds like an interesting debate in of itself. I still say that Abraham is the source of all, no matter how different each is. There is a reason they are called Abrahamic faiths rather than Mosaic faiths.

 

[Pegg]

Hmmm, sounds like an interesting debate in of itself. I still say that Abraham is the source of all, no matter how different each is. There is a reason they are called Abrahamic faiths rather than Mosaic faiths.

yeah and thats the part that I disagree with for a number of reasons.

Abraham worshiped Jehovah... Islam does not acknowledge that name of God at all. If you asked them who Jehovah is, they would not know. So thats a huge point of difference right there.

What Islam really follow are the laws given by Moses... and those laws are not based on Abrahams worship of God because Abraham did not have them. Abraham had no dietary restrictions for example, nor was he ever required to worship at a temple or make sacrifices.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

yeah and thats the part that I disagree with for a number of reasons.

Abraham worshiped Jehovah... Islam does not acknowledge that name of God at all. If you asked them who Jehovah is, they would not know. So thats a huge point of difference right there.

What Islam really follow are the laws given by Moses... and those laws are not based on Abrahams worship of God because Abraham did not have them. Abraham had no dietary restrictions for example, nor was he ever required to worship at a temple or make sacrifices.

You are, of course, welcome to your own interpretations. I, also of course, have my own.

I still don't see what difference Moses makes? Yes he added to the laws of the Jews and yes Christianity built on that and yes Islam built on that as well. So? It's all built on Abraham so why point out someone in the middle of the process and say because he added something to the religion it means this particular group can't go all the way back to the beginning. Makes no sense to me. Moses made changes to Abrahams religion. David made changes to Abrahams religion. Jesus made changes to Abrahams religion. Mohammed made changes to Abrahams religion. It doesn't matter, its all still Abrahams religion.

 

[Pegg]

You are, of course, welcome to your own interpretations. I, also of course, have my own.

I still don't see what difference Moses makes? Yes he added to the laws of the Jews and yes Christianity built on that and yes Islam built on that as well.

Moses didnt 'add' to the laws of the jews because at that time (1513bce) there were no laws and the Jews were not even a nation at that time...they were a slave race in Egypt.

Moses instituted the covenant between Isreal and God...he was the mediator of Gods agreement to bring Isreal out from slavery and made a nation and give them a land of their own, the land he promised to give Abraham...hence the 'promised land'
The Mosaic laws were the laws that they had to agree to abide by if they wanted to be Gods people. Before those laws were given, they were not Gods people...they were on their own as slaves of egypt so there was nothing for moses to 'add' to...he could only give them something completely new


The christians did not keep those laws either...they soon came to depart from the mosaic law as a whole because they came to realise that Abraham was not called 'Gods friend' because he followed the mosaic law. He was called 'Gods Friend' because he was a man of 'Faith' and it was his faith that put him in good standing with God.

Islam chose to adopt the mosaic laws though...thus they are a religion built on 'works of law' not faith.

It's all built on Abraham so why point out someone in the middle of the process and say because he added something to the religion it means this particular group can't go all the way back to the beginning.

to truly get back to the beginning, you have to do away with laws such as mosiac laws.
Abraham did not need mosaic laws to be Gods Friend. He was Gods friend because, even without written laws, he obeyed God willingly from his own heart. And that is what a 'faith based religion' is all about. It about knowing God well enough to not need a written set of laws to abide by and obey because the laws of God are within a persons heart and obedience stems from a persons own willing conscience.

Makes no sense to me. Moses made changes to Abrahams religion. David made changes to Abrahams religion. Jesus made changes to Abrahams religion. Mohammed made changes to Abrahams religion. It doesn't matter, its all still Abrahams religion.

I guess it depends on what you think 'Abrahams religion' consisted of.

If you think it is keeping the sabbath, avoiding pork, cutting off a thiefs hands, stoning adulterers/fornicators, killing blasphemers etc etc etc, then you'd have to show how all those are what Abraham actually practiced.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The very word assassin is of Muslim origin.

Their entire belief system is easily corrupted by extremism.
This is probably not helped by being totally Male dominated, with very Little social intercourse with females, to help mitigate their more testosterone driven excesses.
I am sure Mohamed would be appalled, by what he intended to be an enlightened and peaceful religion to be so misused.

WORD HISTORY Active in Persia and Syria from the 8th to 14th centuries, the original Assassins were members of the Nizaris, a Muslim group who opposed the Abbasid caliphate with threats of sudden assassination by their secret agents. Other populations of the area regarded the Nizaris as unorthodox outcasts, and from this attitude came one of the names for the group, ḥaššāšīn, a word originally meaning "hashish users," which had become a general term of abuse. Reliable sources offer no evidence of hashish use by Nizari agents, but sensationalistic stories of murderous, drug-crazed ḥaššāšīn or Assassins were widely repeated in Europe. Marco Polo tells a tale of how young Assassins were given a potion and made to yearn for paradise-their reward for dying in action-by being given a life of pleasure. As the legends spread, the word ḥaššāšīn passed through French or Italian and appeared in English as assassin in the 16th century, already with meanings like "treacherous killer."
Read more: assassin: Definition from Answers.com