What do you feel is wrong with Islam?

[Don Penguinoini]

Well, the fact that it is teh fastest growing religion in the west isnt a good thing.

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

I cannot image an endeavor that could be considered a greater waste of time. So, you recommend that we sit, with baited breath, learning all there is to know from the white-washed fabrications around "Prophet" Muhammed [pbuh]? Are you saying that not a single thing written by non-Muslims is factual in any way?

No that is not what I am saying. They need an evidence to support it. not their ideas or thoughts on it. Like some non muslims say muslims do this and that when it is clearly something prohibited in islam.

[quot]Yes, but "being" and "believing" are two different things, no matter how hard one believes something to be true does not make that something so.[/quote] My point exactly which is why it goes back to the evidence again.

There is that, taken from a jaundiced viewpoint, but if one considers that SO MANY things were written by so many people, with varying accounts, simply underscores the probability that something of note actually DID take place. It wouldn't be as convincing if each account was identical, to the letter. That would smack of a white-wash as evidenced in the foundation of modern day Islam where orginally all opposing viewpoints and accounts were dismissed.

I am not asking them to be identical. but if we are talking about someone who took place in history. If we are to accept what people say about him at least have the individual speaking at the same places or have similar statements. Let those speaking in the book at least witness the account or get it from an eye witness. but this is clearly as historians and theolgians have shown us to not be the case. Jesus is in different places at the same time. He says different things. some of the most pivotal points in his life are not mentioned in some accounts. some accounts are removed and added according to what the scribe sees fit. etc.

Angels are physically real? Now that IS news. If you could be so good as to have one sent over to my house I will put the kettle on. Then again, perhaps this is just something you desperately want to believe. To insist that angels are even "real" could be considered by some to be childish nonesense.

It is apart of the unseen which we as muslims believe in. Much like the air we breath. we know its there. The angels were created by Allah and just because we may not see them does not mean they are not there. For we are told they are made out of light so it may be possible to see them alot.

Yes. To my thinking, hearing slightly differing accounts is FAR more convincing that hearing a rather boring one note symphony. It is interesting how Muslim's feel that this approach validates their thinking and yet, if anything it strikes the reader as being less than genuine. No, single authority's saying even something slightly different sounds like a marketing campaign to me. Doesn't it strike you are odd, Muhahid Mohammed? Not a single authoritive person dissenting on any single thing. How likely is that to be real and not a complete fabrication?

so you would rather hear the story from many different people who may or may not have heard it and definitely did not witness it. You would rather except their stories which are based off of oral traditions spread around the provinces and neighboring tribes and families. As opposed to one person and his diligent followers who were the witnessess of this person.

Now, I just want to be clear you feel hearing from those who were not there, got their stories from oral accounts which may or may not have been from actual witnessess. As opposed to people who witnessed it, and saw it with their own eyes and they themselves wrote it down. If this is true, every lawyer in the country would want you to be in his jury.

And again I am not saying it needs to be exactly right. I am saying they should be close at least. For example from the bible who was there at the tomb of Jesus, nobody knows according to it. what were his last words on the cross, and why are not any of the people there saying what he said. and why are not his statements the same, I mean if I am to believe his statement. Was he on a mountain or in a valley. why didn't John even mention some of the things in matthew if they was with him. they have places in the bible where Jesus supposedly was and in another gospel he is in another area. they do not know where he was.

Maybe they just do not care. I don't know.

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

Please understand that I believe the Qur'an is the word of God, not Muhammed.

My point is that the Qur'an during the process of recitation, memorization and writing is subject to the memory of those companions.

And the Messenger himself.

Why did the Qur'an require recision if it was perfectly recorded BEFORE the recision?

We have already been through this it was to keep the recitation the same. for when others made copies other then the one the Messenger ordered the companions to compile. It was memorized perfectly by the companions they wrote it down.

If it required recision at all, then the copies of the Qur'an varied one from the other.

differed how? If i write the word. Boudoir and then write (boo-dwar) are the words different? Do you understand them different? do you pronounce it different? Is there a different meaning?

The recision process itself is NOT a guarantee of perfect rendition of the original.

It is when its the sahabi of the messenger of Allah.

In the end insistence that the Qur'an is a perfect transmission of Muhammed's original recitation is no more trustworthy than insistence that the Bible is perfect.

Based on what is that by you looking at all the different Quran's versions of the Quran in arabic, good luck finding any. And comparing them with all the version of the bible how many are there again.

There is only one Quran, one version. One recitatation. One word of Allah.

Baha`i holy text is all authenticated and original documents and transcriptions all still exist. That's a big advantage in trustworthiness.

Regards,

Scott

authenticated by who? Allah? You?

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

Is it then not equally childish to assume that Pixies are not real without evidence?

sure, much like santa claus. yet many believe in that too.

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

To the extent that's true, it's because of Muslims immigrating to Western countries and having lots of children; it's not because Westerners are embracing Islam at a breakneck pace.

There are seperate statistics showing it based on the number of actual reverts.

If you measure by percentages, Wicca is the fastest growing religion in the United States.

I can see that, and have heard that as well. Being a nation of majority christians I wonder how they feel about that.

 

[McBell]

There are seperate statistics showing it based on the number of actual reverts.

Where?

I can see that, and have heard that as well. Being a nation of majority christians I wonder how they feel about that.

Um..
At least it isn't {insert belief here}?
Since the majority of Christians I know consider EVERYTHING that is not their belief to be from Satan, I seriously doubt it makes any difference to them.

 

[Popeyesays]

"
Quote:
Baha`i holy text is all authenticated and original documents and transcriptions all still exist. That's a big advantage in trustworthiness.

Regards,

Scott
authenticated by who? Allah? You?"

For me to presume what Allah authenticates and does not authenticate is ridiculous because all knowledge resides with God not you, not I.

Regards,

Scott

 

[TashaN]

Is it then not equally childish to assume that Pixies are not real without evidence?

Meaning?

 

[Smoke]

There are seperate statistics showing it based on the number of actual reverts.

Then let's see them.

 

[TashaN]

No its not Americas fault or the UKs its islams

So are you claming now that Islam teaches me to be a terrorist?

Are you informed enough about Islam to tell me where does Islam teach that?

That is a remarkably stupid statement. Given roughly 160 million Christians, are you truly insisting that 0.02125 % could not be misled or otherwise in error?

If you insist on playing childish number games, let's look at the popular vote for our beloved President Bush ...

• 2000: 50,460,000
• 2004: 62,060,000

Oh, my: an increase of 11.6 million, a number that makes 34,000 seem pitifully insignificant. Sometimes people do stupid things ...

Sorry to tell you that this is a misleading comparison. Those who embraced Islam in the US right after 9/11 did it because they been exposed to the truth about Islam because they were reading about the faith which the media claims that the terrorists embrace. And guess what? many searched about Islam, embraced Islam because they got to know Islam, then they helped to fight the terrorists as well. Of course there was some people who became muslims and joined the terrorists but most of them were the good guys.

To the extent that's true, it's because of Muslims immigrating to Western countries and having lots of children; it's not because Westerners are embracing Islam at a breakneck pace.

If you measure by percentages, Wicca is the fastest growing religion in the United States.

I agree that some muslims have alot of children, but that doesn't mean all Muslims do so. The apologist just found out that they should grap something to jusify the increase in muslims population in the US and the West in general.

 

[Smoke]

I think more Westerners would convert to Islam if it wasn't for extremists. And "extremist" doesn't have to mean "blowing up a building".

I think you're right. There used to be Muslims on RF who presented Islam in a very good light; unfortunately, they've been run off by the intolerance of their co-religionists.

 

[Smoke]

I agree that some muslims have alot of children, but that doesn't mean all Muslims do so. The apologist just found out that they should grap something to jusify the increase in muslims population in the US and the West in general.

Nobody said all Muslims have lots of children. However, Muslims in Western countries have higher birthrates than most other groups.

 

[TashaN]

Islam denies the Gospel which is that Christ died, was buried, and rose again so that all who trust in him may have the free gift of eternal life.

I put my trust in Jesus as i put it in all the prophets of God. Jesus "Isa" didn't claim to be God and he asked no body to worship him. Paul (Saul) ruined your true faith in God. All what modern christians believe in is based on Paul's teachings but not Jesus's or God's.

One thing I feel is wrong with Islam, as opposed to religion in general:

The Qu'ran and the hadith, which form the basis of Islam, seem to me to be difficult to reconcile with the ideals of liberal democracy, such as separation of church and state, freedom of expression, and religious/cultural tolerance. Or rather, they are more difficult to reconcile than the New Testament, and we have seen how difficult it was for Christendom to finally embrace these ideals.

The mosques don't rule the government in Islam, and the President must be elected by people and the law is accepted by all muslims which is what prophet Mohammed put forward for them based on the Quran and Sunnah. Freedom of expression is granted for all, and regarding the religious/cultural tolernace, the muslims have been much way better in treating the non-muslims than any religious authority in the past would do so, where no rights were granted by any written law for the world to see at that time. Just examine the historical records and you will know excatly what i'm talking about.

 

[TashaN]

Nobody said all Muslims have lots of children. However, Muslims in Western countries have higher birthrates than most other groups.

Then you don't have a proof that the high birthrate is the major reason for the increase in muslims population.

 

[Smoke]

Then you don't have a proof that the high birthrate is the major reason for the increase in muslims population.

I said immigration and higher birthrates. But here's a little word problem for you:

Anna has two children.
Iman has seven children.
Who has more children?

 

[Somkid]

I think the problem with most religions is that "god" is involved and everyone seems to know his will and decides to take matters into their own hands in his name thus the rest of us suffer.

 

[TashaN]

I said immigration and higher birthrates. But here's a little word problem for you:

Anna has two children.
Iman has seven children.
Who has more children?

Oh my my! I'm not that dumb dude!

I got what you mean but still, that doesn't prove that the reasons you presented are responsible for the increase of westerners who embraces Islam.

Not all muslims have alot of children.
Not all non-muslims have less children.

Also ...

Not all immigrants are muslims.
Not all muslims have arabic names.

 

[K.Venugopal]

I find NOTHING wrong with the revealed word of God--the Qur'an, nor the Prophet Himself.

It is only when men have seen fit to misinterpret the word of God and the teachings of the Prophet for their own purposes that any problem arisers.

That said--this is true with all revelaled religion.

Regards,
Scott

All reading is always an interpretation by the reader. The trouble is when there is something like an official interpretation and we are not allowed to deviate and interpret for ourselves. Official interpretation should be valid only for governmental matters, not for subjective religious matters.

 

[Mr. Peanut]

I put my trust in Jesus as i put it in all the prophets of God. Jesus "Isa" didn't claim to be God and he asked no body to worship him. Paul (Saul) ruined your true faith in God. All what modern christians believe in is based on Paul's teachings but not Jesus's or God's.

The question of the thread was:
"What do you feel is wrong with Islam?"

My answer to the question was:
"Islam denies the Gospel which is that Christ died, was buried, and rose again so that all who trust in him may have the free gift of eternal life."

Jesus, NOT Paul said in Luke 24:
44And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
45Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
46And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

And Jesus said in Luke 18:
31Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished.
32For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: 33And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.

And Jesus said again in John 3:
14And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, (on the cross): 15That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

This is Jesus, NOT Paul, saying he must be crucified, buried and rise again according to the scriptures that whosoever will believe in him shall not perish but have everlasting life. He also said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father but by me. He also forgave sins, accepted worship, and said he was the Son of God, making himself equal with God, for which the Jews crucified him. He also could control the elements and performed miracles, "his name being called Emmanuel, which being interpreted is GOD WITH US." This is all from the Gospels, not Paul. I uphold that by denying Jesus own words, that he, "must be lifted up" on the cross, "the lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world", that "whosoever believeth in him shall...have everlasting life", by denying these, is what I feel is wrong with Islam. That was the question of the thread.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It's a story, produced/conveyed decades after the 'fact' by apologists who may very well have been eye witnesses to absolutely nothing.