-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Official Islamic Thread
- Thread starter AmMortal
- Start date
Verano said:this is a question that I want to ask muslims!
Why can't muslisms have other names other than Ali, or Mohammed such as Dave, Kevin, Michael, etc.?
That's an enigma for me.
It's not forbidden. It's just frowned upon. Muslims like to maintain their cultural identity, whether they need visual cues through beards or by maintaining arab-esque names. It's like asking why christians don't name their children Muhammad, Ahmad or Bilal etc
My statement was about the different traits that are associated with Third World nations, a lax human rights record being one of them. Sharia law, without question, does not help. My problem is with Azih's statement that Islam has had nothing to do with the state of current Muslim nations. The issue of apostasy that we were discussing earlier alone proves that Sharia law is ridiculous. My other problem is with those who are delirious enough to believe that Non-Muslims live great and equal lives in Muslim nations. Hell, just the simple notion that a Christian can become a Muslim but a Muslim cannot become a Christian disproves that.joey_z said:
Wait wait wait wait wait. I 'used' to be Muslim, in that I was born and raised Muslim, but then I was like "You know what, I think Atheism is my thing". So now I'm supposed to die? Well that's just rude - and isn't making me feel any warmer about religion, let alone Islam.
C'mon guys, raise your hands if you think I should die.
C'mon guys, raise your hands if you think I should die.
Verano said:this is a question that I want to ask muslims!
Why can't muslisms have other names other than Ali, or Mohammed such as Dave, Kevin, Michael, etc.?
That's an enigma for me.
Same reason why you don't see little white girls named like... Fathia, and Muniba and the like.
SoulPlaya said:
Islam by many muslims is looked upon beyond a religion. It is also a state in itself. Apostasy is the equivalent of treason, and like many many nations, treason is punishable by death. If people don't have a problem with tired systems like nations and tired concepts having legal jurisdiction like patriotism, then I don't see why Islam should be treated any differently.
And that's exactly what I've been arguing for, me and you agree on this aspect. Islam transcends ethnicity, race, nationality, and thus, a much more engrossing religion that other major religions. I don't believe a person should be killed for trasone ither but if you think that if someone converts away from Islam, then they should be killed, then damn.joey_z said:
Yes you will find ACTUAL concerte reasons for why those countries are in the states they're in and they are far more solid and actual than 'religion'. I pointed out quite a few of them for you for various different countries and you will note that they are pretty damn different from each other with Iran being the most tragic. Sticking in 'religion' obscures these actual reasons and completely screws up what approach needs to be taken to fix the problems.SoulPlaya said:
Saudi Arabia and Pakistan
I gave you a huge paragraph on all the problems that Pakistan is facing which has nothing to do with religion. Saudi Arabia probably technically isn't in the third world as it is extremely prosperous but let me tell you whatever problems Saudi Arabia has are COMPLETELY unlike the problems Pakistan has. Which is odd since your conception of 'religion' being the problem would indicate there would be at the very least a lot of overlap in the problems seeing as they're both made up of generally very religious people. There aren't. Your theory falls apart.
You are blaming the problems of the region on it, Which *is* ridiculous.
SoulPlaya said:
See this is the entire problem with this debate. You and many other people 'believe' that death should not be a punishment for anything. Muslims 'believe' otherwise. There is and can be no documented proof or factual evidence to support either belief unless you mean to use it as a deterrent for something.
The only morals secular states follow are those that coincide with peace keeping measures. It's the classic theological debate of the moral atheist and whether he can actually exist or not. So any human rights made are made by humans. If one group says killing is wrong who is to say they are right other than the fact that they believe it is wrong? It is as scientifically valid as the belief instilled by Islam.
Ideologies will remain as ideologies. No one will ever be right or wrong.
SoulPlaya said:
=/ What did I do to deserve to die?
And... Hmm... I don't know what it is, but it seems like 90% the Muslim's I have met are all pretty engrossed in Islam. My personal family in particular, not so much, they're the most laid back I've seen. But yeah, I think I have to agree that Islam is very much intertwined with people, much more than your 'average' (see Protestants) religious person.
What that probably equates to... is associating every bad thing a person does with the religion who openly states that the said religion guides his every movement.
I think it's much simpler than that. People are jerks - as a species, humans are big big jerks - and without years and years of human rights activists and terrible world wars and hippies, people stay jerks. And again, when a good portion of these jerks go on about how Islam is their guiding light or whatever it may be, can't blame someone TOO much for associating the religion with the jerkatude.
But I'm rambling, my main point is... I think this 'in-humanity' is something that transcends religion, and goes to our very nature and design.
PS. Dun kill me =/.
joey_z said:
That's some heavy stuff right there, and actually an ideology I try to live by.
Well no argument for that bit but with an important caveat at the bottom of the post.PhlegmMaster said:
Abrogation isn't a universally accepted explanation for the differences as you seem to think it is. Context of the revelation of the verse is a major factor. Peacetime verses are different from wartime verses for the obvious reasons and maintans consistency in the message.
Well first you're assuming his view on apostasy is the same as his view on political Islam and second that that Universities are representative of the Islamic mainstream.
*BUT* I do agree with you that his views aren't mainstream among Muslims but that refers to Muslims IN THE THIRD WORLD. Which is kind of a theme that I'm bashing at here. Controlling for that is kinda necessary.
Hadji said:
So anyone who LEAVES Islam should be killed?
Damn.... that's a really fucked up point of view.
To give a point of view, do you kill people for changing their favorite colors? Changing what books they like? Changing their SHOES?
Hell, changing their opinions on a scientific theory based on new evidence?
If you do,. goddamn, how're there that many muslims?
Althane said:
I think someone else mentioned previously that those that accept Islam then reject it and then make it public to hurt the religion, are those that are killed. Those that reject it privately are treated like Muslims. It is like a high treason kind of thing. Also, killing apostates has been practiced since Judaism, so it isn't exclusive to Islam.
Hadji said:
But it is rarely practiced today except by primitive barbarians. Whether that is or is not a correct description of Islam will depend on whether those Muslims agree with you or not.
Regardless, your belief that apostates should die is utterly disgusting. I am fully supportive that people like yourself be scoured from this planet before they enact their dangerous fantasies on members of my species.
Instigator
Banned
Hadji said:
What ancient people did and how they justified it is hardly an excuse for barbaric behavior today.
TheGrayGhost
Banned
I studied Islam briefly last semester, and I eventually want to be able to read and speak Arabic so I can read the Koran. Such a beautiful religion, and I was surprised to learn how alike Islam and Christianity are. There are a lot of misconceptions about many religions in the world, which is a shame.
Hadji said:
I seriously am curious about this now. I was born and raised Muslim. I am now Atheist. How am I harming Islam by doing so? Does god require my prayer to grant him power? Am I diminishing his access to the force or something? Or is it more like I am harming this superficial image of Islam being a superior religion in that there are very few apostates.
I damn well don't know any other Muslim other than you who feels this way. It's frustrating as hell that I am now someone that apparently has a good reason to be killed. And for what?
All of Egypt's laws must conform to Islam, and they can be pretty restrictive when it comes to religious rights. Sharia laws are applied in Libya and to some extent in Tunisia. Tunisia, however, has spent plenty of years battling Islamic fundamentalists. Morocco has spent years reforming itself but still has a ways to go culturally. I've actually lived in Syria, and my time there was pleasant. Once again, though, I've already stated that not all Muslims believe in the same thing, that would be ridiculous.Yazan said:
Yeah, that's definitley true.Azih said:
This isn't about the death penalty as a whole. Some of us on this Earth just believe that the death penalty (or numerous lashes which often result in death) shouldn't be used so loosely. We just don't believe that because someone drinks, or a women disobeys her husband, or someone changes religion, or a woman gets caught with a man, or if a person speaks out against Islam, etc. that they should be painfully punishment.joey_z said:
Once again, I DO NOT believe that the sole reason for these countries problems is Islam. But living in a society in which Islam is so dominant is not helpful.Azih said:
I think you guys are just being FAR too defensive. No matter what you may want to believe, your religion IS NOT perfect. I'm talking about the religion, itself. When it gives justification for the beating of women and the killing of apostates, something is wrong. You may call it a differenec in culture or ideology, whatever, it's still wrong. It's sad too, many of you blindly support Sharia law as if it's a blessing from God, when most of the people who must suffer underneath it are Muslims. I'm not saying Islam is all wrong or should be abolished, it just needs serious reform (third world and first world, as the article that Phlegmmaster posted showed) and people must realize that not everything Mohammed said should be followed. This isn't the 7th century.
May be wrong, but hasn't Christianity as a religion had the most "reforms"?
I see reforms as refinements in a religion. They take out the bad parts, and keep the good parts... (and yes, sometimes it's the other way around.... puritans!)
Anyways:
Those who practice something, realize that something is wrong, then speak out about it? A LOT of people do that. They're called whistleblowers, and they're a GOOD thing.
And you can't commit treason against a religion. It's ridiculous, unless it's a theocracy (Treason is an act against government). And theocracy is -not- a valid form of government. (It used to be. Today, it is not).
And notice that a fuckton of things that were practiced 200 years ago (much less, what, 5k?) aren't practiced today. Try again.
I see reforms as refinements in a religion. They take out the bad parts, and keep the good parts... (and yes, sometimes it's the other way around.... puritans!)
Anyways:
Those who practice something, realize that something is wrong, then speak out about it? A LOT of people do that. They're called whistleblowers, and they're a GOOD thing.
And you can't commit treason against a religion. It's ridiculous, unless it's a theocracy (Treason is an act against government). And theocracy is -not- a valid form of government. (It used to be. Today, it is not).
And notice that a fuckton of things that were practiced 200 years ago (much less, what, 5k?) aren't practiced today. Try again.
Althane said:
I have a different take on that. I believe that the original form of a religion, if it were true, should never be changed. Those that change it are only changing what their god ordered them to practice. Of course, most of GAF will disagree since most of folks here are atheists, so the "truth in religion" factor is taken out.
Well, you see, this is one of the factors, as mentioned earlier. Those that belong to a country in which Islamic law is practiced is where killing apostates exist. Nobody has the ability to take things into their own hand and it is only done through courts.
Once again, those that are fully aware of the consequences of apostasy have no reason to make it public other than to hurt the religion. Especially while residing in such a country.
Giving up on habits = Need to reform "outdated" religions? Is that the argument that you are trying to make?
SoulPlaya said:
You have to realize that "Sharia" is an ever changing body of law that is based on Scripture. Even the word itself has many deep meanings, one could be interpreted as a flowing path of water like a river, winding. It's ever changing because circumstances change, and there are clear cases in scripture where particular attributes in certain cases have meant multiple ways to address those cases.
The consensus among most traditional schools of thought (the most often cited schools of thought) view the death punishment only applicable to those who not only apostates, but have then invented stories and lies about the faith, and then refuse to leave the country when asked to leave. One thing that is obvious, is that the decision is totally up to the person.
SoulPlaya said:
That's not strict at all. In fact, it is understood by most scholars that little things we say or do could be blasphemous and that at all times you "renew" your faith by reciting the declaration of faith. Note, we aren't killing ourselves or asking others to kill us if we do any of these things, again apostasy isn't the crime here. We simply ask for forgiveness.
Keep in mind that most of these major schools of thoughts only consider apostacy a crime punishible by death, after certain conditions have been met (ie. person fabricates lies, refuses to leave, etc.).
SoulPlaya said:
It's PEOPLE doing the controlling, not an invisible force. You can say that "Nationalism" controlling the US and turning it into an ultraconservative nation, but in the end it boils down to people using it as a political tool for a means.
If it was the case that the "all controlling Islam" is ruling these societies...then why aren't they the cleanest countries on Earth? Or the friendliest? Or the fairest in terms of business? There are only portions and parts of Islam being projected to the masses, and not surprisingly, these parts only serve the whims and desires of those in power. Al Qaeda doesn't talk about how we should treat our parents. The Taliban never ever spoke on the importance of educating women.
You're thinking an invisible force is at play here, when it all boils down to people and their agendas.
Verano said:this is a question that I want to ask muslims!
Why can't muslisms have other names other than Ali, or Mohammed such as Dave, Kevin, Michael, etc.?
That's an enigma for me.
A lot have names like Dawud (David), and Mikhail (Michael), as those are Biblical names. joey_z is pretty much right, it's for identities sake. I've heard though that converts (or reverts, from a Muslim perspective) don't really need to change their names...but many do so.
Atrus said:
You're no different than Hadji. You're killing people due to their beliefs, and he's for the killing of people who abandon their beliefs.
-addendum-
Time for Fajr!
FightyF said:You're no different than Hadji. You're killing people due to their beliefs, and he's for the killing of people who abandon their beliefs.
-addendum-
Time for Fajr!
The desire to murder people as a matter of belief is unacceptable and calling it as part of your belief system is an unacceptable excuse. Humanity need not tolerate religions that pose a threat to humans, in this case, any that contemplate active murder like Hadji's, the Taliban's and many other distinct groups within and outside the Islamic umbrella.
Are you saying that societies should tolerate a group desiring to practice meso-American child sacrifice ceremonies like the Capacocha? Why then should his beliefs about murdering people be tolerated? Why should any species tolerate a religious ideology bent on destroying either it or its members?
Like any disease on humanity you quarantine it, you vaccinate the people against it (in this case through education), and you eradicate the infection once isolated.
"It's their culture!" and "It's their religion!" are all unacceptable excuses.
Hadji said:
I'm Christian. And I believe that our changes, reformations, actually help bring us back closer to what God wanted than what we strayed from. It's a simple concept: Humans fuck things up. Every once in a while we need to fix it up. Saying a religion has been kept "pure" for so long is just, well, pure bullshit. It's more likely you're following the ravings of a demented old man who's just lashing out against everything he doesn't like in the world. OR following the words of supposed scholars who are just trying to keep power.
For a informing and amusing book, how about you read "Small Gods" by Terry Pratchett. It's fiction, so it shouldn't damage your god if you read it. After all, mine doesn't seem to mind all the fiction I read that states that he doesn't exist. At least, y'know, my life isn't falling apart, I'm not dying of horrible diseases, and haven't been smitten yet.
Hell, I'd actually just beg your god to go ahead and erase me from the universe if he exists. It's not one I'd like to live in.
*blink blink*
Your government is flawed. Religious choice is -not- a practice government can regulate. And don't say it doesn't, you just said that if you change your religion from islam, you get killed. Fuck that shit. Hell, I don't even agree with the courts HERE most the time!
Here's a question: If I convert to Islam, find out that you guys are doing a lot of things I don't believe that your religion calls for, and convert BACK, and announce it, I should be killed? Dude, maybe you should think about THIS: Sometimes religions NEED to be hurt. It's what stops them from doing all the stupid shit that you guys are doing now, that you're spewing in my face.....
You missed something: KILLING PEOPLE for giving up on habits. Or hell, killing people in general.
Y'know, for being a feature of religions that killed an awful lot of people, Jesus was actually a pretty, y'know, peaceful guy. As in, "Let he who is without sin throw the first stone." (and no, he did NOT proceed to throw a boulder). And that whole peace thing.
Edit:
Damn, if your god is THAT Worried about you being blasphemous, he's got severe OCD issues. We should watch what we do, but I'm not generally worried about being blasphemous... I mean, it's not like I go around making statements like "GOD AIN'T REALLLL" and stuff. >_O
And to crazy mcreligiouscrazy: If you're SO WORRIED about your faith, I think you're doing it wrong. You're weak in the faith, basically, if you're so worried that someone changing religion and announcing it can damage your own faith. That, or your faith is -wrong-.
Think about that.
Atrus said:
I'm not really sure what you want to happen though? Quarantine everyone who says they are Muslim? Do the whole mark on the arm thing? I'm sure you don't actually mean all that crap, but there's not much short of that you can do.
Also - all the really extreme stuff isn't happening over here in the western countries, and if it does, it is quickly condemned and squashed out by the law, terrorism aside. So going over to another country to them tell them how to run it is... well poor taste. Irregardless if freedom of thought is a foreign concept there, justifying starting some war over it is bullshit. It's unfortunate, but that's just how it works there.
It is my belief that morals and ethics are a personal thing, belonging to each individual in it's own unique way, what is right for one is not right for another and all that jazz. Just because the more powerful country has a large majority that may thing one universal concept is wrong (executing apostates bleh) doesn't mean that it's an ideal that everyone needs to feel/follow. Just make sure you live in a country that closely matches how you feel.
And in the end, no one is being barred from leaving the country, if they want to leave and move to another country to avoid the laws above them, they can. If they're too poor to afford a ticket, maybe some of the countries to the west should start some sort of reach out program for those who want to leave? More than that I don't know what else anyone can or should do about it.
Nah, I think it's good that people get a full view of Islam. Quite a few muslims like to pretend that beliefs like Hadji's just don't exist anymore which is just as harmful as non muslims thinking that beliefs like Hadji's are the *only* ones that exist or even that they're extremely dominant. There's a wide variety of opinions from muslims in this thread and that is the reality of the situation. The thread is good.
It's not even the dominant one, or a major one
Which is a weaker statement than the one you originally made and I'm still calling bull on it.
Take the situation of Pakistan. If Islam magically disappeared tomorrow from Pakistan than nothing much would change. But if feudal landlords disappeared Pakistan would be in a much better place, if ethnic strife disappeared Pakistan would be in a much better place, if the insane amount of the GDP going to the millitary was directed to infrastructure instead Pakistan would be in a much better place, if Afghanistan got it's damn act together and shut down all it's opium production Pakistan would be in a much better place. I'm glad that you agree that Islam isn't the *sole* reason for the countries problems but it isn't the dominant or even major problem that the country faces.
Oh lordy, I have no idea who you're talking to SoulPlaya because it certainy isn't me. Good god. Let me remind of one of the things I said in my FIRST RESPONSE TO YOU GODDAMN.
Jeeeeezus.
Take a look at how muslims (and one former muslim) *in this very thread* are reacting to what Hadji said with horror, repulsion, and disbelief.
Althane said:
Wait... let me get this straight.
So, as a Christian, you believe that you can get closer to God by disobeying the rules He laid down instead of following them because they seem outdated to you? By the way, what makes those laws outdated? Have we really evolved so much that the "barbaric ancient laws" shouldn't apply anymore?
Are you saying that Christianity is no longer pure? Or needs to be changed to keep up with the times in order for it to be pure?
No, you wouldn't be killed until you really do understand the religion, what it is about, and practice it. Which is a lot more than I can say for most Muslims today.
Wait, I thought you just said that because the "witness" that brought her was the person that committed adultery. Of course, I could be wrong. Also, Jesus wasn't really all that peaceful. Remember, he had cities wiped out and thousands killed... in the OT that is.
Lev 24:15 And say to the people of Israel, Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin.
Lev 24:16 He who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him; the sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.
Learn about your god before you criticize mine.
Azih said:
I'm sure I would feel the same if I didn't know jack about hadeeth literature.
Lol! I didn't realize that this was directed at me until just now. =)
I'm not worried about my faith. There are a billion Muslims out there and I know that the religion isn't going to die anytime soon. I don't believe that a thousand apostates can cause the religion to fall apart.
In all honestly, I think you are the one that is worried about his faith. I mean, let's be frank here. The only reason that you are talking this nonsense about keeping up with the times is because of the crap you get from the secular world.
You see, the difference between you and me is that you care so damned much about how others view your religion. You are so obsessed with your own image as a "rational person" that you'd rather substitute the divine laws with fallible man made ones.
Heck, to me, it doesn't make a difference how you feel. I will not be able to please everyone, so I might as well stick to what I believe is true instead of going like, "Oh hey! Wait! That was just in the past when God's laws were perfect! Now, we are just like you folks! =D"
Hadji said:
I believe that Jesus set up a new order, one where we don't HAVE to apply to those "outdated" laws. New age/order/era, ect. They no longer are needed for anything. Hell, I believe that those laws were in place to ensure the survival of the Jews. As for getting closer to God, I follow Jesus' example, or as try as I can. And no, "We" haven't evolved. The world we live in, the society we live in (one, oddly enough, encouraged by religion) has changed. And I would say Christianity lost its purity when it became "big". People became more focused on things that didn't really matter (Catholics), or too worried about themselves (Puritans) to do it correctly. Me? I just try to do good works, tell people about my faith when it seems like they'll listen, and it'll help, and obey man's laws.
Oh, I see how it is. You're one of those kinds. Nevermind then. Go about your life. I'm pretty sure nothing I tell you will penetrate your steel ball of a mind.
Father, Son, Holy Ghost. Son was Jesus. God in the OT was the Father. Really, even if it's just a saying, you can see how religion changes. God was the holy, wrathful god who killed and protected his people, because it was an old and barbaric time. Genocide was typical warfare back then. Jesus came, and society was peaceful, there was no longer a need to protect through such power. Instead, it moves towards spreading the Word.
It's the evolution of a religion, don't you see it? Or I guess not. Basically: Wrathful Father for protection, Peaceful Jesus for preaching, and Holy Spirit for... uhm.. well, okay, I haven't gotten that far in my ponderings yet.
Your god sucks.
And read what I put above.
Maybe you take your hadeeth literature too seriously.
I mean, really, why so serious? What would happen, if tomorrow, something came out and revealed that your prophet was just high on drugs the entire time, he was a multiple child raper, committed genocide countless times, destroyed countless priceless artifacts, encouraged his followers in such actions, and ect, ect, ect.
Remember that rocks aren't always the safest things to be. Sand may get washed away, but rocks just get broken down to sand. (Never did really like that proverb!)
Atrus said:
And the desire to murder people because you disagree with them IS acceptable?
Nope, just saying that I'm not for the killing of anyone who claims to believe in doing that.
But how about your beliefs about murdering people?
Do you think that we should perhaps kill you because you are inclined to kill him?
And "we can't tolerate it so we must kill them" is an acceptable excuse?
Heh, did the anti-logic brigade decide that today was a good day to step in this thread? :lol
Why would an all powerful God worry about us? This knowledge is for our own sake.
Yeah...it might help if you read the last page of posts.
And a little logic won't hurt, I'm reading some of your arguments with Hadji and they aren't making any sense at all.
Althane said:
Actually, God in the Old Testament was God. It isn't like the Son didn't exist until Jesus was born.
Remember:
Jhn 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
My god doesn't order us to kill everyone that blasphemes against the religion. The god of the OT does. Of course, I don't have anything against the god of the OT. However, you seem to have a problem with some of the rules that He put down.
I'd become a Catholic.
Ela Hadrun
Probably plays more games than you
Hadji said:
The difference here, Hadji, is in the New Testament the Apostles there is a huge debate over whether or not people (particularly Gentile converts to Christianity) are required to follow Judaic law. Peter has a vision where God presents him with non-kosher food, and Peter is like, "Lord, you know I can't eat this" and God is like "You'll eat what I put in front of you bitch," and that is the revelation interpreted as meaning that Christians are not held to Mosaic law. (And this is in keeping with the Islamic belief that prophetic messages previous to Muhammed (pbuh) were specific to time and place.)
So actually the Christians quoting Leviticus to persecute people are actually the ones who don't know their religion.
Also P.S. Judaism has absolutely as many laws as Islam. They are both really similar in that way. Same structure of things that are required, things that are recommended, things that are neutral, and things that are not o.k. Lots of modern Jews (like lots of modern Muslims) don't look to their religion for things like hairstyles or irrigation, but if they want to, and some do, it's in there.
Unlike the Christians, who are like WOOOO HAIRSTYLES WOOO IRRIGATION I DO IT HOWEVER I WANT
Ela Hadrun said:
I like you. =)
By the way, I've very aware of how Christians treat the OT. I know that Christians aren't required to put blasphemers to death. The only reason I quoted the verses was to teach SoulPlaya that God, at least in the OT, forbade blaspheming. This is what SoulPlaya criticized about my god, while being ignorant that his god went as far as putting a law that dictates the killing of the blasphemers.
I hope my intentions are more clear with this.
Ela Hadrun
Probably plays more games than you
Hadji said:
Oh Hadji, my parents would have SO MUCH fun with you.
...Give you a nice new name like Xavier... or Francis....
...Get you a new suit for your First Communion...
...A nice Rosary someone in the neighborhood brought back from Lourdes...
It *probably* wouldn't make them feel better about the Church losing me, but my parents are pretty much settled down about that anyway. :lol
Ela Hadrun said:
:lol
I'd so go for Xavier. It's got an X ANND a V! =O
In all honesty though, I pick Catholicism over being a Protestant easily... and no just to piss off SoulPlaya. It is so much more stable when it comes to the interpretation of Biblical verses. I remember reading up on the different views of transubstantiation and Catholic thought just appealed to me from that.
Of course, I do have some issues with Catholicism... well, ugh... second choice anyhow. =p
I know you're using a collection of sayings recorded around two centuries after the Prophet died to justify *killiing* people who of their GOD GIVEN FREE WILL turn away from Islam. There is *nothing* in the Quran that supports that and plenty that speaks AGAINST that kind of horrific behaviour. There is plenty of freaking compulsion in your religion.Hadji said:
Azih said:
Even if we were to assume that there are no authentic hadeeths. The scholars of the four math-habs, as FightyF mentioned a few posts back, have all agreed that this was practiced by Mohammed (pbuh).
Abu Hanifa did meet some companions you know. He didn't just feel like adding a law to the religion just for the hell of it. Those companions saw Mohammed (pbuh) kill apostates. Why assume that you would know any better than those that personally met the companions?
Edit: As I've stated before, the whole compulsion in religion thing has to do with forced conversions and not apostasy.
Considering the founders were born long after the Prophet Muhammad died what pray tell did they base their conclusions on? Nothing that I would consider trustworthy. The Quran is the word of God. What Hanafi said isn't.Hadji said:
Why are you defiying these people?
Wow, so once you're a muslim compulsion becomes A-OK?
Earthstrike
Member
Hadji, To my understanding it says in the Quran everyone is born a muslim. Does this not qualify all non-muslims as apostates?
I know all about that. Let me just say "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone", so I'm not ignorant.Hadji said:
And Azih, I should've been clear, the last part of my last post was NOT directed towards you. I should've been clearer and for that I apologize. You're a level-headed guy and it's great to have a discussion with you. We disagree over how important of a role Islam plays in these countries. You brought up Pakistan, but what about Saudi Arabia? Iran? Kuwait? Sudan? Nigeria? I'm sure that if Islam disappeared things would still be fucked up but at least the motivation would be different. You brought up how bad things happen in Christian third world countries but the motivation there is different. Drug money or blood diamond money and the government doesn't usually use its religion to justify brutal laws.
Yes, I know that in Muslim countries there are also terrible conflicts over money and tribal differences but to think that Islam (and its laws) have no role, I believe, is a little absurd. You seem to think that those who think Hadji are a small minority, they aren't as small as you think (even in the Global North). And, to be honest, I really haven't seen too much repulsion over Hadji's comments from other Muslims. You've pretty much been the only one, others have either been Non-Muslims, former Muslims, or Muslims showing suppport to him.
We disagree I think on how important of a role Islam plays in these countires problems. Which is a different thing.SoulPlaya said:
I mentioned Iran as well in my original post look it up.
And I'm saying it really wouldn't be. For one thing a lot of the ugly things in those countries are *cultural* rather than religious. Forbidding women to drive isn't a muslim thing, it's not even an *Arab* thing. It's unique to a few Arab countries. Like I said all the countries that you mention have extremely different problems (with the possible exception of Kuwait and Saudi). In each of those countries you will find other things going on that are much more pressing and have nothing to do with religion. Now I am most familiar with Pakistan, Saudi, and Iran but even a cursory examination of your other examples shows the same thing. African countries are all in extremely bad situations, the fact that Muslim African countries are as well doesn't exactly show anything about Islam. Sudan has a lot of ethnic and tribal violence. African Muslim Sudanese are discriminated against as well by the Arab Muslim rulers. Note: http://greatparanoiac.wordpress.com/2006/05/27/muslims-fighting-muslims-in-sudan/ Darfur isn't religous, it's ethnic and tribal.
And you didn't note WHY I brought them up. It was to point out that the common factor is the THIRD WORLD aspect. Which is much much more important than the religous aspect.
*Never* said that. I'll quote myself again
NEVER said that either.
In this thread? There's quite a few.