Why Islam makes more sense conceptually of all the Abrahamic faiths

[Epic Beard Man]

It is disappointing isn't it? I am fairly close to abandoning the whole business and just trying to find the intelligent Creator.

Find whatever makes you happy. It does help to have a supportive community behind you though.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

“Deniers of Baha’ism” is an addition to the text inserted by the Muslim divines, the term “donkey” is stated in response to an individual and forms Baha’u’llahs way of critiquing that individual for being able to carry the scriptures but not understand them.
Hence the reason donkey is not in the plural form because it does not refer to all deniers of the Baha’i faith

How did Muslim divines touch the text?

 

[Tumah]

So although according to Judaism, Jews are tasked with duties to fulfill and are chosen above all nations to fulfill them, Islam takes the general approach in that all human beings prior to their existence in the world made a covenant with God. I get your explanation but however you slice it, the philosophy behind chosenness still has an exclusionary element.

I am not denying that Judaism is exclusive. I'm only modifying what you originally claimed that Judaism is excluding non-Jews from. It is not from having G-d as G-d, or having a relationship with G-d altogether. It is from the degree of relationship with G-d.
Again, I'm not trying to compare Judaism to Islam here, so there's really no need to bring it up what Islam believes. I'm only trying to fix your presentation of Judaism.

 

[danieldemol]

How did Muslim divines touch the text?

Your quote is lifted from an anti-Baha'i website which contains a translation of something Baha'u'llah has said, as translated by the Muslim divines with the additional words highlited being added by them which do not appear in the original text

 

[England my lionheart]

Epic Beard Man quote:

Islam requires all human beings to respect each other and respect living beings and creatures.

The reality is so far away from that, from the beginning of Islam to this present day there is a total disrespect both in the quran and its followers for apostates atheists gays bhai ahmadis polytheists, the list could fill a book, there is also the division between Shia and sunni and different sects.

In the Islamic world you would be hard pressed to find this respect anywhere Islam rules, that being said the abhramic faiths aren't very respectful anyway.

To answer the op, yes Islam makes sense but only to its followers,from an outside perspective it needs a reality check like Catholicism does imo.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Very controversial topic and for the record, this is not to devalue Judaism or Christianity considering both have important roots from within Islam. This subject is purely my opinion based on the ten plus years of study of Islam, philosophy and its metaphysics.

Without getting into a scriptural debate since this subject is not about debating scripture I’d rather focus on some important points that would make Islam more of a middle and moderate belief system a few points about God:

1) Allah, or God in the Islamic perception is seen as the God of humanity. Although in Jewish philosophy Ha’Shem or YHVH is considered “Master of the World” as I was told, historically and even some of the orthodox lectures from Rabbis seem to present God as centralized to a specific people as opposed to the species of humankind. Allah is one, the Creator of all planets and galaxies. Allah is the Lord of all of the things that existence and that doesn’t and that is in between.

2) Allah like Ha’Shem, is genderless. God is not human and unlike Christianity, God does not need to transform into a human being to save mankind. However, unlike Judaism Islam does not demand 600 plus laws upon individuals, rather the basic minimum for a believer. Islam requires all human beings to respect each other and respect living beings and creatures.

Regarding Study

Averroes once implied in his lectures that Islam imparts the obligation for all believers to question and examine reality for God’s existence. Without simply blindly denying God, one must examine the processes of how things perform and then and only then one will find God’s handiwork.

Regarding Ethics

Unlike Christianity, there is no original sin, therefore, whatever sins you accumulate are of your own doing and of your own soul. Unlike Judaism to be pious one does not need to observe additional laws to conduct oneself although there are sayings in which are suggestive in emulating Muhammad the prophet, these sayings are variant opinions based on the ideas and research from Islamic scholars.

On good and evil Allah is the author of both. Good and evil either come about by individual action, independent action (such as neutral good and evil-that is, actions that result in good and evil are independent of action by the individual for example a tornado that destorys a house and kills a family is independent of human action but can be perceived as bad or evil based on the suffering and or/death). Then there is Allah purposefully inflicting bad things happen to affect and challenge your faith.

The acceptance of prophets

Islam requires the recognition of all prophets from all nations. That means even not mentioned in scripture, if historically one finds monotheistic prophets from different parts of the world one can infer via study, one can study the potential of various prophets that aren’t mentioned in scriptures.

Although this is an opinion, this brief synopsis has shown some important examples.

I initially felt agreement towards what you posted, then reconsidered as I have insufficient knowledge of Judaism.

In regards Christianity compared to Islam, Muhammad states true Muslims must believe in all the prophets with emphasis on Jesus and Moses. This is a belief in progressive revelation of God that makes sense of what’s gone before. Further Muhammad makes some important corrections to Christian beliefs. Particular examples are the Divinity of Christ, the trinity, and His being literally the son of God. Reevaluating each of these conceptions of God has some merit. The Christian doctrine of original sin is problematic as with an understanding of the nature of evil. So on each of these areas of disagreement between Christianity and Islam, Islam appears more coherent and so I find myself in agreement.

Of course everything I have said is highly debatable and even contentious. Christians and Muslims have been debating each other on these very points for years. Then comparing both to Judaism may not be well received. Add in a pinch of Islamiphobia and this thread is almost certain to raise temperatures.

 

[Augustus]

I knew this. And then they killed Ali, the so called rightful heir to Islam, according to the Shia. Islam is very messed up. I think that Abu Baker followed Muhammad. He is said to have formed the first Calif. Stories circulate that Ali was the rightful heir, but he did not want it, and left to go to modern day Iraq. On his way there, he was murdered by the followers of Abu Baker.

Aisha, according to Muslims is the one who compiled the notes of Muhammad PBUH, and that became the Quran. This from Muslim speakers at the Mosque. I've heard non Muslim "scholars" tell a different story about these things, but what do they know?

What I find common in a lot of religious faiths is that historical faiths all tend to diverge from whence their original message was intended for and a similar paradigm shift can be said about its adherents. Sometimes the death of charasmatic leaders produces the fragmentation of a once unifying ideology.

In the early days, the Caliph was seen as God's deputy on earth and had the power to settle religious disputes. The community was guided by the Quran and the sunna of the Caliph.

The legitimating power of the Caliph declined over time due the civil wars, and the stalled expansionism of the Islamic Empire after their initial successes.

Differing schools of thought emerged to fill this gap: puritanical kharijites, 'rationalistic' Ahl-al Kalam, proto-shia favouring the family of Ali and proto-Sunni who sought to establish a Sunna of Muhammad.

"Patricia Crone and Martin Hinds have meticulously traced the process by which the Prophet rose from playing virtually “no legitimatory role” in the early caliphate to becoming for the proto-Sunnis the exclusive source of legitimacy. “Once the Prophet
had acquired his capital ‘P’, straight descent from him was an unbeatable claim,” and it is precisely to make this claim that the proto-Sunnis embraced hadith so wholeheartedly."

The above point is supported by the fact that the name Muhammad is almost entirely absent from the historical record for 70+ years until around the time of abd al-Malik it suddenly becomes widespread in inscriptions, coins, etc.

Such crises [in legitimation] often lead to tremendous creativity: history is replete with examples of religious thinkers, activists and movements which have attempted to reformulate traditions—by developing new plausibility structures or recovering old ones (or some combination of the two) — to meet new circumstances...

Interestingly, the proto-Sunni development and use of isna¯ds fits into a broader phenomenon observable throughout the Muslim world at the time: the widespread “manufacture of legitimizing genealogies.”37 Among the proto-Sunnis, this hadith-based sunna, in turn, was elevated to almost equal status with the Qur’an in terms of its authority to guide the belief and practice of Muslims. Indeed, in later Sunni Islam, this notion was formalized as hadith was made the so-called “second root” of Islamic law. In this formulation, while the Qur’an retained its theoretical supremacy and liturgical centrality, it in fact became subordinate to hadith insofar as the Qur’an had to be interpreted in light of hadith and not vice versa. This elevation of hadith was a highly significant development, in light of the fact that sunna had previously been understood generically as the practice of caliphs or of upright people in general. Why this shift, and what did it mean?


The Roots and Achievements of the Early Proto-Sunni Movement: A Profile and Interpretation - Matthew J. Kuiper.
The Muslim World • Volume 104 • JANUARY /APRIL 2014

 

[Apologes]

It really doesn't. It appears in the 7th century and tries to present itself as some original teaching from which Judaism and Christianity strayed away and presents absolutely no evidence for this claim what so ever.

This on it's own has many problematic implications such as all the prophets' views being radically different than what was shown in the Jewish and Christian scriptures, perhaps most notably Christianity's central figure Jesus Christ whom Muslims claim did not preach what was attested by all the earliest records we have and was instead a prophet. This makes the circumstances of Jesus' conflict with Judaism and the severity of his punishment and death on the cross a lot harder to explain than simply stating that he did teach something radically different that is considered blasphemy both by Jews and Muslims.

Speaking of Christ's death on the cross, the Muslims have been very persistent in denying that their second most important prophet underwent such a humiliating death but that it only appeared to them that he did. Some would try to say that Allah put someone else on the cross while others would insist that Jesus somehow survived his crucifixion. Both of these are highly implausible as they are completely non-verifiable and ad hoc while the latter flies in the face of virtually all historical records we have of both Jesus' trial as well as the beliefs of his followers.

The list of factual errors and all other sorts of implausible aspects of Islam could go on but the problems I mentioned so far show that Islam requires a series of very implausible, unsubstantiated and historically undermined assertions some of which are theologically problematic while others are down-right in the category of historical revisionism. Before some object that Judaism and Christianity are also guilty of this, it needs to be pointed out that (to play the devil's advocate here) Islam accepts a far greater number of them as it builds upon the fallacies of the previous two and adds a whole new wagon of them. As such, it is hardly more plausible than it's predecessors.

 

[Deidre]

The problem with the infighting is the result of the conflict of the initial successorship of Muhammad, then it evolved into a culture clash which also gave rise to geopolitical conflicts.

I don’t doubt that but it’s basically a patriarchal religion like all the abrahamic faiths. Which isn’t a bad thing inherently but many men make it bad, you know?

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Your quote is lifted from an anti-Baha'i website which contains a translation of something Baha'u'llah has said, as translated by the Muslim divines with the additional words highlited being added by them which do not appear in the original text

Interesting. Then care to tell me this? (I just randomly stumbled on this):


“The inhabitants of a country life Africa are all as wandering
savages and wild animals. They lack intelligence and knowledge; all are
uncivilized; not one civilized and a wise man is not to be found among
them. These are the proofs of the wise men. The prophets also
acknowledge this opinion, towit: That education hath a great effect
upon the human race, but they declare that minds and comprehensions are
originally different. And this matter is self-evident; it cannot be
refuted. We see that certain children of the same age, nativity and
race, nay, from the same household, under the tutorship of one teacher,
differ in their minds and conprehensions. One advanceth rapidly,
another is slow in catching the rays of culture, still another
remaineth in the lowest degree of stupidity. No matter how much the
shell is educated (or polished), it can never become a radiant pearl.
The black stone will not become the world-illumined gem.” (Tablets of
‘Abdu’l-Baha p.567 vv.3-4)

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I don’t doubt that but it’s basically a patriarchal religion like all the abrahamic faiths. Which isn’t a bad thing inherently but many men make it bad, you know?

Well I don't think the male gender is the issue, rather the structure and how one does with power that creates the issue.

 

[Thief]

Like Christianity in the Crusades?
, , , or I might jog your memory of more atrocities by Christians against those who believe differently even between different churches like in Ireland. There are no angels among fallible humans.

yeah of course......Christians have their down side.....

but we are no longer killing our women for indiscretions

 

[Thief]

now if we want to point fingers to history

picture yourself a Moses.....yes you can

you fled Egypt....why?.....
you killed someone

you wander about with people that believe in a God.....
and they tell you of God's mountain

so....at the ripe old age of 80 you go where others fear to tread
you go up on that mountain
you go to meet your Maker
and you go with no intent of return
for no man returns from that joureney

and as God deals His Ten Commandments unto your hand
you scribe the words in stone

and He pronounces......Have no other god before you
(and what did you do in the house of Pharaoh?

You shall not kill
(and what did you do that thrust you from Pharoah?

and what did you do when you descenced the mount?

you called upon the tribe of Benjamin to draw sword
and kill 3000

(correct my report if I have errored)

 

[Thief]

do you think God favors a man with sword in hand?

the angels have long been displayed as such

want to walk with the angelic?

think you know what swords are good for?

 

[Thief]

Is that so?

It seems to me that some diversity of interpretation and implementation is not only expected, but also healthy. There is also a real need to consider the change of possibilities arising from historical, social and technological circunstances. That, too, has some effect on religious priorities and possibilities - and it should.

Reliance on the originator is not necessarily a good trait, and it does not explain nor justify the actual lengths of divergence that happen later.

And again, Islaam is rather remarkable in that respect, even among the Abrahamic doctrines.

except for the last line.....I agree with you

how pray tell.....is Islam remarkable?

(new thread?)

 

[LuisDantas]

except for the last line.....I agree with you

how pray tell.....is Islam remarkable?

(new thread?)

I think this fits well enough in this thread.

Islaam both insists on stating that it is immutable (to the point of denouncing innovation) and lacks the proper means to deal with differences of interpretation in a constructive way.

It was indeed in a difficult situation from the moment of Muhammad's death, if not even before. It just lacks much of an ability to grow beyond what it can hope to justify from the Qur'an and the Sira.

 

[Jumi]

I find it more useful to look to individuals than the Abrahamic religions themselves. There are some wonderful folks in each of them and there's those terrible ones too.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Is this something a significant number of people say?

I dunno. I'm from the Bible Belt. I've heard it a lot. YMMV.

I've never met a Muslim who will explain the psychopathic behavior of Muhammad and Qur'an for what it is, sadistic psychopathic behavior and talk!

Former Muslims might.

However, it is far more common in the Islamic world, at least in the 21st century.

Debatable. I have a hard time with the media when it so clearly desires foreign enemies instead of domestic ones.

What is the Bible truly about?!?? Why should I believe you over thousands of conflicting claims to 'know?'

I would suggest the most accurate opinion (if there is such a thing) is that the bible was a set of books written based on oral legends for the purpose of giving their immediate audience alternative stories to the most popular of the day, like how supposedly there's this book on amazon where this crazy lady tried to make a "Christian Harry Potter" story. It's so bad, from what little I've seen of it in screenshots, that she basically just substituted proper nouns and almost all the rest is just plagiarism. The bible was never meant for the entire globe in the 21st century. Look at ancient maps and you can see how far their concept of "world" went. They thought everything would be dead by now, just as we tend to see global destruction "right around the corner." The bible doesn't care about anyone but the people intended to read it, none of them being us. We can see this by the closing of the biblical canon, which makes no sense if one believes God is eternal. Shouldn't the Word also be eternal? Shouldn't we still be writing books for it?

want your daughters subject to such things?

I live in the US. I'm far more concerned my imaginary daughter would be attacked by rednecks raping for Jesus or something like the asinine "incel" movement, where they finally let go of religious imagery and just acknowledge they want to rape because for some reason women find them too creepy to date and it must be our fault.

I find it peculiar that in scripture, God can save Moses, Noah, and Abraham through divine revelation or through angelic intermediaries, yet, from a spiritual standpoint it is necessary that a human needed to be tortured and killed for the metaphysical benefit of humankind.

Yeah, that's kind of dumb. I find it fascinating that the bible gets more atheistic or whatever as you progress through the texts. He can visit with Cain after sin has supposedly entered the world and have a conversation, but later on supposedly God is allergic to sinners and will need an epipen if He's anywhere near them.

At any rate, when I meet a good Muslim like you, it makes my heart heavy and sorrowful to attack the Qur'an like it is the most evil, ugly book ever!

Maybe it helps if you realize all religions are theological fandoms.

Like, I'm a Harry Potter fan, consider myself a Slytherin, and yet I'm not evil. I simply value "cunning, resourcefulness, and ambition."

 

[Thief]

raping for Jesus

seriously?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Very controversial topic and for the record, this is not to devalue Judaism or Christianity considering both have important roots from within Islam. This subject is purely my opinion based on the ten plus years of study of Islam, philosophy and its metaphysics.

Without getting into a scriptural debate since this subject is not about debating scripture I’d rather focus on some important points that would make Islam more of a middle and moderate belief system a few points about God:

1) Allah, or God in the Islamic perception is seen as the God of humanity. Although in Jewish philosophy Ha’Shem or YHVH is considered “Master of the World” as I was told, historically and even some of the orthodox lectures from Rabbis seem to present God as centralized to a specific people as opposed to the species of humankind. Allah is one, the Creator of all planets and galaxies. Allah is the Lord of all of the things that existence and that doesn’t and that is in between.

2) Allah like Ha’Shem, is genderless. God is not human and unlike Christianity, God does not need to transform into a human being to save mankind. However, unlike Judaism Islam does not demand 600 plus laws upon individuals, rather the basic minimum for a believer. Islam requires all human beings to respect each other and respect living beings and creatures.

Regarding Study

Averroes once implied in his lectures that Islam imparts the obligation for all believers to question and examine reality for God’s existence. Without simply blindly denying God, one must examine the processes of how things perform and then and only then one will find God’s handiwork.

Regarding Ethics

Unlike Christianity, there is no original sin, therefore, whatever sins you accumulate are of your own doing and of your own soul. Unlike Judaism to be pious one does not need to observe additional laws to conduct oneself although there are sayings in which are suggestive in emulating Muhammad the prophet, these sayings are variant opinions based on the ideas and research from Islamic scholars.

On good and evil Allah is the author of both. Good and evil either come about by individual action, independent action (such as neutral good and evil-that is, actions that result in good and evil are independent of action by the individual for example a tornado that destorys a house and kills a family is independent of human action but can be perceived as bad or evil based on the suffering and or/death). Then there is Allah purposefully inflicting bad things happen to affect and challenge your faith.

The acceptance of prophets

Islam requires the recognition of all prophets from all nations. That means even not mentioned in scripture, if historically one finds monotheistic prophets from different parts of the world one can infer via study, one can study the potential of various prophets that aren’t mentioned in scriptures.

Although this is an opinion, this brief synopsis has shown some important examples.

I would say by contrast that I understand Muslims cannot feel assured of salvation, per Islam and the Noble Qu'ran, but that I have great peace and assurance of salvation.