What do you know about Islam?

[fatima_bintu_islam]

I will. It's inevitable, isn't it.

Thanks for watching , it is evitable for me at least ( I hate to let things happen without having a hand in it )

 

[kejos]

That's not the part i was objecting to, it was your conclusion.

Ok, we agree that it was only Muhammad who saw the angel. But did he? Anyone could claim to have seen an angel.

"Why did you steal the motor car?"

"An angel told me to do it."

It would stand up in no court of law. One needs witnesses, independent witnesses. Islam requires four of them for punishing adultery and sodomy. Why just one for the revelation of the book that requires those four?

Absurd, you see.

 

[kejos]

Thanks for watching , it is evitable for me at least ( I hate to let things happen without having a hand in it )

Evitable, eh. I must make a note.

 

[fatima_bintu_islam]

Islam is an Abrahamic religion with a prophet called Muhammad. Submitting to the deity called Allah, which Islam considers to be the one and only deity, is a central aspect of the religion. The scripture Islam is based on is called the Quran, but there are also the Hadiths, which to my knowledge are about the life of Muhammad.There appear to be quite many rules in Islam, but I am not sure if that is how Islam is or how some followers has interpreted the scripture.

And as all religions, there are followers that are good and decent people, just as there are followers that are, in lack of better words, truly evil.

Thanks for sharing kerr

Im happy to see that almost everyone know the basis of Islam, good thing to know

but I am not sure if that is how Islam is or how some followers has interpreted the scripture.

Then what are you waiting for ? Go search for the right answer if you're interested in knowing

 

[Badran]

Ok, we agree that it was only Muhammad who saw the angel. But did he? Anyone could claim to have seen an angel.

"Why did you steal the motor car?"

"An angel told me to do it."

It would stand up in no court of law. One needs witnesses, independent witnesses. Islam requires four of them for punishing adultery and sodomy. Why just one for the revelation of the book that requires those four?

Absurd, you see.

Yeah i see. But we didn't just take his word for it. However, it is the nature of some beliefs to be hard to explain, and/or can not be proven, right?

 

[fatima_bintu_islam]

Ok, we agree that it was only Muhammad who saw the angel. But did he? Anyone could claim to have seen an angel.

"Why did you steal the motor car?"

"An angel told me to do it."

It would stand up in no court of law. One needs witnesses, independent witnesses. Islam requires four of them for punishing adultery and sodomy. Why just one for the revelation of the book that requires those four?

Absurd, you see.

How did you know Jesus was sent by God?
ANyone can claim the same

"Why did you help me? "

" Because Im coming from heaven "

Absurd, you see

 

[kejos]

Yeah i see. But we didn't just take his word for it.

No, but the Arab contemporaries did.

However, it is the nature of some beliefs to be hard to explain, and/or can not be proven, right?

Like UFOs.

 

[YmirGF]

@Yrmi Gf:

Oh sorry I just saw it , thank you for participating

The pleasure is all mine.

Well, I know now why you wanted me to see your post soo bad

No, it was more because you were sniveling that people were deluding (meaning derailing) the thread from your intended purpose. I thought it would be helpful to put the ship back on course.

Thats a very good thing what you did, at least you wont have an excuse on the day of Judgment hihihi.

Well, sadly, I will not be attending Allah's little "Love in", but do give my regards to the big fella, in my stead. I do hope everything works out for YOU.

Its those who have an excuse that I pity the most lol

But he is all so merciful. What could go wrong?

Ohoo, no please, dont accuse me of taqiyaah. Taqiyyah is a horrible thing in my religon , Im sunni btw .

I'm human. If you actually investigate the concept of taqiyyah you will find that it isn't what you might think. No doubt you are already an authority on the subject though. Popular misreading of the concept give this impression it is about lying. If the truth be told it is probably better rendered in English as "diplomacy". If you know anything about diplomacy you will understand that the art of diplomacy is the art of bending the meaning of words and NOT lying outright. That is what taqiyyah really is.

I say what I have in mind, I dont lie, having purposes behind your speech has nothing to do with lies right?

Indeed and I imagine you will endeavor to employ a fair amount of diplomacy in your opinions, other than to those nasty, vile descendants of "apes and pigs".

Now, thats what I call taqiyyah

So, I see we agree that taqiyyah means diplomacy, after all. This is a good start. :flirt:

 

[kejos]

How did you know Jesus was sent by God?

Aaaaah. So Islam exists only to oppose Christianity.

 

[Badran]

No, but the Arab contemporaries did.

I can't see where this is headed. Weren't you saying that anyone who believes that, has a hidden motive, that's the only part left here. If you mean not all people, but certain people, then okay it doesn't matter to me which people are those. If you're saying all people, then i disagree.

Like UFOs.

So you are objecting now to the concept of belief?

 

[Badran]

But isnt the history of Islam steeped in war since its inception? Muhammad led his followers to battle his own tribe, the Quraysh, and has fought the Pagan Arabs, and also Jews, after his death, an eternal rift in Islam was created in a deep division between his followers, into what became Shia Islam, and Sunni Islam, only a few decades after the death of Muhmmad, the Battle of Karbala took place, in which the supporters and relatives of Hussein ibn Ali, Muhammad's grandson fought the army of the Umayyad caliph Yazid, Sunnis and Shiites across the world still commemorate this battle between their sects to this day.
It is a fascinating fact that the grandson of the prophet died in battle fighting other followers of his grandfather, and these followers eventually became the largest Islamic sect.

Yes, i understand what you're saying. For the first wars, Muslims were not the strong side, and most of these wars were fighting enemies, Quraysh were serious enemies and directly fought Muhammad (pbuh) and his message. As for the the conquests that follows and the conflicts and so on. I honestly believe that any religion and people in general, when they are in power, has often led to the same results. constant wars and interference in other countries are a constant attribute until today associated with countries in power.

 

[fatima_bintu_islam]

Aaaaah. So Islam exists only to oppose Christianity.

Excuse me Yrmi GF, do you think diplomacy is useful with such statements ?

f the truth be told it is probably better rendered in English as "diplomacy". If you know anything about diplomacy you will understand that the art of diplomacy is the art of bending the meaning of words and NOT lying outright. That is what taqiyyah really is.

As far as I know, the first use of taqiyah by shia, is to lie to sunnis about their beliefs in order to make them think that they are sunnis, thats what I read about this in their books.

And if taqiyah means diplomacy , then diplomacy to me means to speak and speak for hours, and the purpose is that at the end, the interviewer doesnt have a clue wether you agree or not on an issue.

Indeed and I imagine you will endeavor to employ a fair amount of diplomacy in your opinions, other than to those nasty, vile descendants of "apes and pigs".

Me no speak english good, I didnt get this one.

Its those who have an excuse that I pity the most lol

But he is all so merciful. What could go wrong?

Well, it may go wrong for me instead of going wrong for them

If they did not make an effort finding whose their creator, and denied all the blessings he gave them then Allah only can tell what will be their destiny.

As for those who wants to find the truth , and I was near them and I refused to help them then I may be the one who will get punished :areyoucra

I do hope everything works out for YOU.

And I hope everything goes for you too

Who knows, you know theres a hadith that a person can be a non believer all his life and then accept the truth before his death by minutes or hours.
While there can be a believer ( in the eyes of people, thats what the hadeeth states, i.e he is an hypocrit acting like if he was believer) but hours or minutes before he die he rejects Islam

( The minutes and hours thing are not part of the hadeeth , I was explaining)
SO may Allah azza wajjal keep us steadfast until we die, and may He guide those who rejected faith anytime before they die , ameen

Best regards

 

[nameless]

Islamic wars are not by default wrong, you are aware of that right? Any war that was about fighting enemies without the horrible things like converting others by force and so on. Also, this is off topic, i already said discussing what some Muslims do or did doesn't resemble anything for me. There are people more informed about this that you can enjoy the endless debate with about wether old Muslims were bad guys or not. I don't know very well about history in general.

of course wars are not wrong by default, but it does not add sense to your statement not all islamic wars were wrong.

1) Not all Islamic wars were wrong.

I don't know very well about history in general.

cannot understand on what basis you made such a claim that not all Islamic wars were wrong

 

[Badran]

Here's the part that is not personal opinion. The overhwhelming majority of the world's Muslims were born into Islam. Islam is spreading because Muslims have lots of children, not because of conversion.

My point is simply that those who convert to islam are not because they are forced to, and there are lots of people who convert to Islam. I'm not trying to make an advertisement that Islam is a special religion, and i clarified that when i saw that i gave that impression. As for Muslims having lots of children, yes definitely true, but people can convert, only certain numbered countries enforce punishment on converts or apostates, not all. These are few countries.

O.K. I do take issue though with the "small minority." I just don't think that's factual. My understanding is that suicide bombers are treated like rock stars in their home countries, are greatly admired, posters on walls, etc. That doesn't sound like a small minority to me.

That's not the impression i see in my country for example at all. There are of course people who view them as heros. However, much more people view them in a very bad way.

Also polling data:

One in four younger U.S. Muslims say suicide bombings to defend their religion are acceptable at least in some circumstances...
..............

Support for terrorism: All the Muslim populations polled display a solid majority of support for Osama bin Laden. Asked whether they have confidence in him, Muslims replied positively, ranging between 8% (in Turkey) and 72% (in Nigeria). Likewise, suicide bombing is popular. Muslims who call it justified range from 13% (in Germany) to 69% (in Nigeria). These appalling numbers suggest that terrorism by Muslims has deep roots and will remain a danger for years to come.
from here.
From 13 to 69% is not a tiny minority. It's millions of people, a terrifying number of people.

I don't know about this website, i've seen other members use this "daniel pipes" guy, and he usually says a lot of lies about Islam. However, since i don't have any other website on my part, okay lets assume this is indeed the case, and it's not a tiny minority. Still, the majority, conformably are not fitting into the dangerous description at all. Which means coming to conclusion about Islam based on the smaller number is unfair.

Islam is dangerous. Fact.

I would agree, but not with this way of putting it. I would agree with "some Muslims are dangerous. Fact".

The fact that there is a debate about it is enough to tell you that Islam is a dangerous, violent, barbaric, criminal religion.

I don't really see it that way. I mean i see it as a serious concern, but it doesn't lead me to the conclusion you came to here. And those conclusions are only concerned with people, not the religion itself.

 

[nameless]

I would agree with "some Muslims are dangerous. Fact".

more than enough to turn this world into hell. These same 'some muslims' were responsible for terrible history of many civilisations.

 

[Autodidact]

Badran:

You are a very calm person, not quick to respond in anger. You really try to stay reasonable in responding to other posters. Maybe I should flip you a frubal on general principles.

O.K. I guess this is my big question. I don't know what percentage of non-Muslim American or Britons approve of suicide bombing, but I'm going to guess it's around .01%. Why do many, many more Muslims than non-Muslims approve of suicide bombing?

I would guess around .01% of Christians or Jews think people who leave their religion should be killed. A substantial number of Muslims believe this; it's a respected, accepted, mainstream opinion in Islam. Why?

I could go on and on:
female genital mutilation, honor killing, so many horrible things. Overwhelming more Muslims approve of them than non-Muslims. If it's not Islam, then why?

 

[Badran]

of course wars are not wrong by default, but it does not add sense to your statement not all islamic wars were wrong.

cannot understand on what basis you made such a claim that not all Islamic wars were wrong

My statement about not all Islamic wars are wrong, was due to the impression i got that they are lumped in together, as if they are all for the same reasons and motives, which is not the case. For example some of Muhammad's battles with Quraysh were not so. Quraysh tortured Muslims just for being Muslims, and they tried to force people to leave Islam. So wars against them was not wrong.

As for my other statement, my point was that i'm not the one you'd like to argue with about history, because i'm not very informative about it, and the other objection was that this is off topic. This thread is supposed to be about people's information about Islam and how well do they think they know about it. Not particularly the conquests of Islam and the actions of the terrorists and such things. Which are also usually the things which are argued most of the time, so i don't really want to argue it each time Islam is mentioned. Or in other words, i believe this thread is about people's information of Islam's teachings and basic beliefs, and how well they know it. Just like the answers some people gave here explaining what they know.

 

[Badran]

Badran:

You are a very calm person, not quick to respond in anger. You really try to stay reasonable in responding to other posters. Maybe I should flip you a frubal on general principles.

Thanks

O.K. I guess this is my big question. I don't know what percentage of non-Muslim American or Britons approve of suicide bombing, but I'm going to guess it's around .01%. Why do many, many more Muslims than non-Muslims approve of suicide bombing?

I would guess around .01% of Christians or Jews think people who leave their religion should be killed. A substantial number of Muslims believe this; it's a respected, accepted, mainstream opinion in Islam. Why?

I could go on and on:
female genital mutilation, honor killing, so many horrible things. Overwhelming more Muslims approve of them than non-Muslims. If it's not Islam, then why?

I would agree that probably less number of Americans for example would agree with suicide bombings, although i don't think it would be 0.1%, but i agree it would be less.

There is something here though, suicide bombings involve the death of the person doing it, that is a part that lots of people wouldn't need to resort to. I mean the main question is how many people would agree with violence against civilians for example, i think the difference wouldn't be big. Especially considering what's happening to muslim civilians all over the world on the hand of armies, yet some people support these armies.

However, i believe the reasons for the higher number is due to very big social problems that face most Muslims in Muslim countries, and raise sympathy of Muslims in other countries that don't have these problems, and it also gives them motive and anger (the ones who aren't in middle eastern countries).

Problems like the numerous wars we are involved in, i believe war has shown the worst in people throughout history. Other examples is oppressive leaders leading to horrible conditions inside the country including poverty. Horrible education and knowledge, which breeds a society not very developed. A society that includes some ignorant scholars that also publish horrible ideas. Another part, is that i believe that there are certain cultural ideas that have been mixed up with Islam through time. These are very few, but from which all the horrible ideas are derived.

 

[Badran]

more than enough to turn this world into hell. These same 'some muslims' were responsible for terrible history of many civilisations.

I never denied that, and i believe they should be fought. But such examples are found in every religion, culture, belief system, race, country or whatever kind of group.

 

[Autodidact]

I would agree that probably less number of Americans for example would agree with suicide bombings, although i don't think it would be 0.1%, but i agree it would be less.

Actually, if you poll non-Muslims, I think it would be more like .0001%.

There is something here though, suicide bombings involve the death of the person doing it, that is a part that lots of people wouldn't need to resort to. I mean the main question is how many people would agree with violence against civilians for example, i think the difference wouldn't be big. Especially considering what's happening to muslim civilians all over the world on the hand of armies, yet some people support these armies.

Interesting point. I'm having trouble finding data from non-Muslims. Here's one chart on Muslim attitudes toward violence against civilians:

It's pretty depressing. I don't think many Americans or Europeans would advocate intentional violence against civilians. I mean, actually targeting civilians, as opposed to civilian casualties in war.

However, i believe the reasons for the higher number is due to very big social problems that face most Muslims in Muslim countries, and raise sympathy of Muslims in other countries that don't have these problems, and it also gives them motive and anger (the ones who aren't in middle eastern countries).

This is interesting. I think there's a shred of truth there--countries at war are going to have more violence, more positive attitudes toward violence, and so forth. We see non-Muslim terrorists too, Tamil Tigers, Irish nationalists, etc. However,

(1) I don't think this is the main reason. It's a bit of a cop-out. "Oh, we Muslims can't help becoming terrorists, we have so many social problems." There are many countries with worse social problems than other Muslims countries, that don't have or sponsor terrorism. Also, in general, if say--actually I'm having trouble thinking of a non-Muslim country that's in a war right now. Anyway, say hypothetically Israel, for example. YOu don't see American Jews strapping explosives to their chests. Why not?

Problems like the numerous wars we are involved in, i believe war has shown the worst in people throughout history. Other examples is oppressive leaders leading to horrible conditions inside the country including poverty. Horrible education and knowledge, which breeds a society not very developed. A society that includes some ignorant scholars that also publish horrible ideas.

And that raises the big question--it's just the same question pushed down the road. Why do so many Muslim countries have these problems, much more than secular countries? Why isn't Sweden at war? Why doesn't Canada have oppressive, totalitarian leaders? Why is education so much better in South Korea than in Yemen? Why do so many Islamic scholars publish such horrible ideas, and what is it about Muslims that causes them to blindly accept them?

Another part, is that i believe that there are certain cultural ideas that have been mixed up with Islam through time. These are very few, but from which all the horrible ideas are derived.

Why is Islam more vulnerable to these horrible ideas than western secular people? Why don't modern non-Muslims in Ohio murder their daughters for wearing short skirts?

It just feels like you do everything you can to avoid the obvious culprit, the single common element: Islam.

Why is Islam so screwed up?