Why condemn a whole people if only a few do wrong?

[mikkel_the_dane]

I do believe in the islamic teaching yes, but do I personally know what Allah truly is?

Of course not. I have a belief that what the quran telling me about Allah is true.

I dont ask others to believe as i do.

That is still your interpretation and not truth other than to you.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'm not talking about 100%; I'm talking about "correct enough to be useful."

Your two examples strike me as false, considering the Muslims I meet in real life.

I have very different experiences.
I have, for example, never heared of a muslim activist for LBGT rights.

Instead, I only see the opposite. I know of gay people who were disowned and casted out of their muslim family and community for coming out as gay. I don't personally know of a single instance where the muslim family simply accepted the gay family member for what they were, with no negative effects.

I'm sure they exist. I'm also sure they are a minority.
In islamic countries in the middle east, they get executed.

It happens often enough, especially in my peer group (Canadian, left-leaning, around my age).

Many Muslims in my peer group are the children of immigrants; many belong to visible minorities; all of them are members of a minority religion. They've generally experienced discrimination themselves and have empathy for other groups who also face discrimination.

That's nice. I'm not going to doubt that.
I can only say that my experience here in central europe is very different.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The prophet Muhammad was

You should become a professional dancer.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I have very different experiences.
I have, for example, never heared of a muslim activist for LBGT rights.

Instead, I only see the opposite. I know of gay people who were disowned and casted out of their muslim family and community for coming out as gay. I don't personally know of a single instance where the muslim family simply accepted the gay family member for what they were, with no negative effects.

I've heard similar stories about Christian families. Still, the church next to my office flies a rainbow Pride flag and has a sign saying that they will perform weddings for all people regardless of orientation. Diversity exists, even within a religion.

I'm sure they exist. I'm also sure they are a minority.

Here in Canada, Muslims in general are a minority.

In islamic countries in the middle east, they get executed.

Well, I'm not in an Islamic country and I'm not in the Middle East.

IMO, political power is what tends to make religions evil. It doesn't seem to matter much which religion is used as the basis if a theocracy; Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, etc. theocracies have all been horrific in similar ways.

... and all of these religions tend to behave reasonably when they're in the minority and aren't given political power.

That's nice. I'm not going to doubt that.
I can only say that my experience here in central europe is very different.

Fair enough, but if Muslims in Canada are very different from Muslims in Central Europe, then this just underscores the fact that merely knowing that someone is a Muslim doesn't tell you much at all about them.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I won't argue scripture with you. Just tell me why all the terrorists cite the Qur'an and why they say they are fighting for Islam? Why is it that millions of Muslims get upset when in Denmark cartoonists draw the prophet and some want to murder the publishers (and do so)? Why are Muslim majority countries funding this terrorism? Why do Muslim majority countries have barbaric laws?
Is there no one but you who understands the peaceful message of the Qur'an?

Thank you. A few good questions that I will try to answer.

Terrorists mostly use fabricated Hadiths as the Quran does not support terrorism. But if they do use it they will quote out of context.

Sura 2:191 kill them wherever you find them. This is just one example.

But the preceding Sura I quoted earlier 2:190 says ‘attack not unless attacked first and says it is an injustice in God’s eyes’. Muslims who never read the Quran just blindly follow the terrorist leaders.

Again, although it’s disrespect to the Prophet, they are not permitted to kill innocent people according to Quranic law, so by doing so they are disobeying the Quran. Thou shalt not kill is a law too but both Christians and Jews have disobeyed it.

Political organisations in Muslim countries have their own agenda. If they obeyed the Quran they could not fund terrorism so once again we are speaking about organisations or individuals deliberately choosing to disobey their own Holy Book.

Some of the archaic laws were pertinent for the desert where there were feuding savage tribes who daily murdered, plundered and raped when there were no prisons, courts or police to confine them.

Today many of these laws are cruel as we are able to retrain and educate criminals.

The main problem is that Muslims have been indoctrinated by their leaders to believe that Muhammad is the last Prophet which is untrue because the Quran speaks of Prophets after Muhammad. Had they understood their Book they might have been open to accept recent Prophets, namely Baha’u’llah, Who has abolished all those laws and brought new ones to replace them for the modern age.

Prophets bring different social laws for each age according to the exigencies of the time. As you have noted rightfully, those laws in this age are not suitable but in that time when the first born, if it was a female, was buried in the sand alive, harsh laws were required then to bring an end to savagery and they worked then, uniting the warring tribes of Arabia into one nation.

Now of course they are at a loss as to what to do as they have no one who can abolish these laws which only a Prophet of God could do. But they have yet to accept the One Prophet Who could extricate them from this dilemma because they are stuck on the belief that Muhammad is the last Prophet just like Christians are stuck on Christ being the only One Who can save us. These fixations come from indoctrination or brainwashing because the leaders always want to keep their power and never hand it over to a new Prophet.


It’s a disease of the mind acquired through being spoon fed over centuries instead of investigating truth for themselves. Now in this age humanity is learning to question more and think for themselves so over time this disease of exclusiveness can be overcome. But it will take time because all the spoon feeding, indoctrination and brainwashing has damaged minds and cause religious fanaticism instead of reason, science and logic to rule.

The priests, clergy and religious leaders, in order to prevent losing their followers to other religions have spared no effort to turn their followers into fanatics who cannot reason or think for themselves anymore.

 

[Heyo]

The main problem is that Muslims have been indoctrinated by their leaders to believe that Muhammad is the last Prophet which is untrue because the Quran speaks of Prophets after Muhammad. Had they understood their Book they might have been open to accept recent Prophets, namely Baha’u’llah, Who has abolished all those laws and brought new ones to replace them for the modern age.

An interesting thought. But you run into the same problem as @firedragon. There are about 5 million Bahai who have understood the Qur'an correctly and 1.5 billion Muslim who haven't. Add to that the way of the Sufi @Conscious thoughts follows and we slowly get to the core of the problem: Once I learn more about Islam, it seems as Muslims are as much at odds with each other as Christians, to a degree that one can say that "Muslim" is a word without meaning.

 

[firedragon]

Thank you. A few good questions that I will try to answer.

Terrorists mostly use fabricated Hadiths as the Quran does not support terrorism. But if they do use it they will quote out of context.

Sura 2:191 kill them wherever you find them. This is just one example.

But the preceding Sura I quoted earlier 2:190 says ‘attack not unless attacked first and says it is an injustice in God’s eyes’. Muslims who never read the Quran just blindly follow the terrorist leaders.

Again, although it’s disrespect to the Prophet, they are not permitted to kill innocent people according to Quranic law, so by doing so they are disobeying the Quran. Thou shalt not kill is a law too but both Christians and Jews have disobeyed it.

Political organisations in Muslim countries have their own agenda. If they obeyed the Quran they could not fund terrorism so once again we are speaking about organisations or individuals deliberately choosing to disobey their own Holy Book.

Some of the archaic laws were pertinent for the desert where there were feuding savage tribes who daily murdered, plundered and raped when there were no prisons, courts or police to confine them.

Today many of these laws are cruel as we are able to retrain and educate criminals.

The main problem is that Muslims have been indoctrinated by their leaders to believe that Muhammad is the last Prophet which is untrue because the Quran speaks of Prophets after Muhammad. Had they understood their Book they might have been open to accept recent Prophets, namely Baha’u’llah, Who has abolished all those laws and brought new ones to replace them for the modern age.

Prophets bring different social laws for each age according to the exigencies of the time. As you have noted rightfully, those laws in this age are not suitable but in that time when the first born, if it was a female, was buried in the sand alive, harsh laws were required then to bring an end to savagery and they worked then, uniting the warring tribes of Arabia into one nation.

Now of course they are at a loss as to what to do as they have no one who can abolish these laws which only a Prophet of God could do. But they have yet to accept the One Prophet Who could extricate them from this dilemma because they are stuck on the belief that Muhammad is the last Prophet just like Christians are stuck on Christ being the only One Who can save us. These fixations come from indoctrination or brainwashing because the leaders always want to keep their power and never hand it over to a new Prophet.


It’s a disease of the mind acquired through being spoon fed over centuries instead of investigating truth for themselves. Now in this age humanity is learning to question more and think for themselves so over time this disease of exclusiveness can be overcome. But it will take time because all the spoon feeding, indoctrination and brainwashing has damaged minds and cause religious fanaticism instead of reason, science and logic to rule.

The priests, clergy and religious leaders, in order to prevent losing their followers to other religions have spared no effort to turn their followers into fanatics who cannot reason or think for themselves anymore.

you said that if terrorists quote the Quran they quote it out of context. I agree many try and intentionally quote the Quran out of context. All good.

But can you give an example of a terrorist group who had quoted these verses you cited?

 

[firedragon]

An interesting thought. But you run into the same problem as @firedragon. There are about 5 million Bahai who have understood the Qur'an correctly and 1.5 billion Muslim who haven't. Add to that the way of the Sufi @Conscious thoughts follows and we slowly get to the core of the problem: Once I learn more about Islam, it seems as Muslims are as much at odds with each other as Christians, to a degree that one can say that "Muslim" is a word without meaning.

1. Which understanding of mine in the Quran is against 1.5 billion Muslims? Could you please explain? You maybe right, but I am curious to know which argument you are looking at.
2. What you did here is not address the argument this gentleman posed but appeal to majority which is a logical fallacy. Rather, address the argument and analyse it even if he is the only human on earth with that particular argument.
3. Can you substantiate your claim about the equation between Christians and Muslims with some specifics? How many madhabs, how many sects, how many key doctrines vary?

 

[Heyo]

1. Which understanding of mine in the Quran is against 1.5 billion Muslims? Could you please explain? You maybe right, but I am curious to know which argument you are looking at.

I didn't say that your understanding is against all of Muslims, just that it seems not to be a consensus. And according to polls (Muslim Opinion Polls) there seems to be little consensus on anything related to use of violence among Muslims.

2. What you did here is not address the argument this gentleman posed but appeal to majority which is a logical fallacy. Rather, address the argument and analyse it even if he is the only human on earth with that particular argument.

Yes, I did avoid his argument as I am not versed enough in the scripture. And since this discussion is about the reality of Islamistic terror attacks, not about the scriptures I leave that to you both to discuss. I'm only interested in the answer.
Is @loverofhumanity correct in saying that the Qur'an speaks of future prophets and is Baha'u'llah such a prophet?
Is @loverofhumanity correct in saying that the Qur'an has archaic laws in it that were only revoked by Baha'u'llah?

3. Can you substantiate your claim about the equation between Christians and Muslims with some specifics? How many madhabs, how many sects, how many key doctrines vary?

We have three people here who have knowledge of the Qur'an, none of you even an extremist but I see three different positions, even though you avoid speaking with each other about the differences. That makes no two people who can agree on the Qur'an from my point of view. Just as I have experienced with Christians.

 

[halbhh]

One thing about religion specifically: religion gets all sorts of benefits - paid for by people like me

If you live in the U.S. (which you might not), then you'd not be paying for any state sponsored church of any kind.

It's true that just like Lion's Clubs or Astronomy Clubs or American Atheists, and so on, that churches, just like all social organizations that are non-profit, don't have to pay income taxes and not usually property taxes. Just like other organizations.

 

[firedragon]

Is @loverofhumanity correct in saying that the Qur'an speaks of future prophets and is Baha'u'llah such a prophet?
Is @loverofhumanity correct in saying that the Qur'an has archaic laws in it that were only revoked by Baha'u'llah?

Good questions. But this is irrelevant to this topic. Absolutely irrelevant. Some people take every opportunity in every thread to proselytise and engaging with that is worthless. Unless, its a new thread.

We have three people here who have knowledge of the Qur'an, none of you even an extremist but I see three different positions, even though you avoid speaking with each other about the differences. That makes no two people who can agree on the Qur'an from my point of view. Just as I have experienced with Christians.

Brother. Appealing to authority, appealing to majority, are not valid arguments. They are logical fallacies.

If you have an issue with two people having two different views, show me which verse you are speaking out, take a read of my argument, then make an informed analysis or decision. Thats a better approach.

I hope you understand.

 

[Heyo]

Good questions. But this is irrelevant to this topic. Absolutely irrelevant. Some people take every opportunity in every thread to proselytise and engaging with that is worthless. Unless, its a new thread.



Brother. Appealing to authority, appealing to majority, are not valid arguments. They are logical fallacies.

If you have an issue with two people having two different views, show me which verse you are speaking out, take a read of my argument, then make an informed analysis or decision. Thats a better approach.

I hope you understand.

I do. You are looking for a scriptural debate. But that wasn't in the question. In fact the question wasn't even directed at Muslims.
@Conscious thoughts asked: "Why condemn a whole people if only a few do wrong?"
The answer to that is not in the Qur'an.
A possible answer is: Because people are ignorant of Islam and falsely assume a consistent mindset built on the Qur'an. "When you know one, you know them all."

 

[Spirit of Light]

I do. You are looking for a scriptural debate. But that wasn't in the question. In fact the question wasn't even directed at Muslims.
@Conscious thoughts asked: "Why condemn a whole people if only a few do wrong?"
The answer to that is not in the Qur'an.
A possible answer is: Because people are ignorant of Islam and falsely assume a consistent mindset built on the Qur'an. "When you know one, you know them all."

Honestly this was the answer i was hoping someone would give, instead of getting in to discussion that had nothing to do with the topic of the OP.
So thank you @Heyo for answering the way you did

 

[firedragon]

I do. You are looking for a scriptural debate. But that wasn't in the question. In fact the question wasn't even directed at Muslims.
@Conscious thoughts asked: "Why condemn a whole people if only a few do wrong?"
The answer to that is not in the Qur'an.
A possible answer is: Because people are ignorant of Islam and falsely assume a consistent mindset built on the Qur'an. "When you know one, you know them all."

Actually, the real reason is because people have a gang mentality. This is prevalent in all kinds of societies. For example, the Japanese hated all Americans at one point. Not just the soldiers, but all of them. Later, it faded away. The question here is, the US is one country but Islam as a theology is about 1/4th of the whole world.

Mate. I am not looking for a scriptural debate. It was an absurd statement to make. Try not to make character analysis but rather analyse the arguments posed.

When they made the Rambo movie in Afghanistan, they praised them. Later, they became enemies and were bombarded to smithereens. At this point, anyone who brings up the Rambo movie was closed up with an argument that said "Rambo is speaking about the Mujahiddeens, not its the Taliban". Utter nonsense. So they are praising this so called "Mujahiddeens"? Thats because there was a lot of propaganda made to overturn the Taliban rule and the media promoted this so called "Mujahiddeens" in western media who were pivotal enemies of the Taliban the US used to topple them. This group were never called the Mujahiddeens. It was a lie.

So at one point, Afghans were valiant in the media, then they became tyrannical enemies, then a story was created about a so called "Mujahideen" which simply means one who strives in the path of the theology, and so on, and so on.

There is a huge level of cause and effect in this game. It cannot be so shallowly summed up just like that.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Actually, the real reason is because people have a gang mentality. This is prevalent in all kinds of societies. For example, the Japanese hated all Americans at one point. Not just the soldiers, but all of them. Later, it faded away. The question here is, the US is one country but Islam as a theology is about 1/4th of the whole world.

Mate. I am not looking for a scriptural debate. It was an absurd statement to make. Try not to make character analysis but rather analyse the arguments posed.

When they made the Rambo movie in Afghanistan, they praised them. Later, they became enemies and were bombarded to smithereens. At this point, anyone who brings up the Rambo movie was closed up with an argument that said "Rambo is speaking about the Mujahiddeens, not its the Taliban". Utter nonsense. So they are praising this so called "Mujahiddeens"? Thats because there was a lot of propaganda made to overturn the Taliban rule and the media promoted this so called "Mujahiddeens" in western media who were pivotal enemies of the Taliban the US used to topple them. This group were never called the Mujahiddeens. It was a lie.

So at one point, Afghans were valiant in the media, then they became tyrannical enemies, then a story was created about a so called "Mujahideen" which simply means one who strives in the path of the theology, and so on, and so on.

There is a huge level of cause and effect in this game. It cannot be so shallowly summed up just like that.

So we all have a gang mentality. Or we all have, except your gang. Which is it?

 

[firedragon]

So we all have a gang mentality. Or we all have, except your gang. Which is it?

1. Who do you mean by "we all"?
2. What do you think is "my gang"?
3. How did you decide that I have separated myself from this "gang mentality" in my post?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

1. Who do you mean by "we all"?
2. What do you think is "my gang"?
3. How did you decide that I have separated myself from this "gang mentality" in my post?

People have a gang mentality.

Either it is all people, then it is meaningless because we all have it and you solved nothing, because there is nothing to solve as we all have it.
Or there is way out and only some people have it, so what is the way out?

 

[firedragon]

People have a gang mentality.

Either it is all people, then it is meaningless because we all have it and you solved nothing, because there is nothing to solve as we all have it.
Or there is way out and only some people have it, so what is the way out?

So who claimed to have solved anything?

Anyway, though I think you are an intelligent person, you are eternally attempting to build a case against someone to personally dismiss the person by building a character assassination strategy. Every time, you look for hypocrisy, but ignore the argument. Since this is "every thread" I dont think there is any value in engaging with you.

Have a great day mate. I wish you well.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Actually, the real reason is because people have a gang mentality. This is prevalent in all kinds of societies. For example, the Japanese hated all Americans at one point. Not just the soldiers, but all of them. Later, it faded away. The question here is, the US is one country but Islam as a theology is about 1/4th of the whole world.

Mate. I am not looking for a scriptural debate. It was an absurd statement to make. Try not to make character analysis but rather analyse the arguments posed.

When they made the Rambo movie in Afghanistan, they praised them. Later, they became enemies and were bombarded to smithereens. At this point, anyone who brings up the Rambo movie was closed up with an argument that said "Rambo is speaking about the Mujahiddeens, not its the Taliban". Utter nonsense. So they are praising this so called "Mujahiddeens"? Thats because there was a lot of propaganda made to overturn the Taliban rule and the media promoted this so called "Mujahiddeens" in western media who were pivotal enemies of the Taliban the US used to topple them. This group were never called the Mujahiddeens. It was a lie.

So at one point, Afghans were valiant in the media, then they became tyrannical enemies, then a story was created about a so called "Mujahideen" which simply means one who strives in the path of the theology, and so on, and so on.

There is a huge level of cause and effect in this game. It cannot be so shallowly summed up just like that.

Okay, I will try to be nice.
The USA is not the Western world, yet not only the USA is tangled up with Islam.
So what do the USA have to do it? What does Afghanistan have to do with, since that is not Islam?

What are you trying to say in general terms about the world if there is a huge level of cause and effect in this game and it cannot be so shallowly summed up just like that.

I am trying to understand if you have a way out if it and if so learn from you. How do we move forward? Be honest and if you have to blame the Western world, present your argument. Then I will ask, what comes next?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If you live in the U.S. (which you might not), then you'd not be paying for any state sponsored church of any kind.

I'm not in the US.

However, you're wrong. These tax-free organizations still receive services that the rest of us have to pay for. This is true in the US as well as here in Canada.

It's true that just like Lion's Clubs or Astronomy Clubs or American Atheists, and so on, that churches, just like all social organizations that are non-profit, don't have to pay income taxes and not usually property taxes. Just like other organizations.

In both the US and here, there are benefits that religious organizations get that other charities don't.

That being said, here in Canada, we have two classes of non-profits:

- charities (e.g. the Lion's Club). They have to be dedicated to a charitable purpose. They pay no taxes and donations to them are tax-deductible.

- not-for-profits (e.g. an astronomy club). They aren't charities, but they don't generate profit and they don't have share capital. They pay no taxes (because there are no profits to tax), but there's no tax credit for donations to them. They have to file financial statements to confirm that they really don't generate profit or dividends for their members.

I would have no issue with the average church being classified as a not-for-profit like an average, say, social club. Right now they get classified as charities even though they don't need to demonstrate that they fulfill a legitimate charitable purpose.

BTW: if you think that churches get treated no differently than other charities, you may want to equate yourself with the case where FFRF tried - and failed - to get the same tax treatment as a church: Atheists give up $1B church tax lawsuit - Becket