Islam: Schizophrenia and Deception?

[another day]

Is the God of the Torah and the Christian bible- jealous, revengeful, fearsome, punishing?

yes of course he is...he is directly described as being a Jealous god, and the other traits are evident throughout the bible.

[ItsDarts]

Genius... I've been following this thread and have noticed that you have not addressed the quran quotes presented by SHW. Near the beginning of this thread, you mentioned "Context", and you've mentioned such things as "thats the way it was back then". So far I have not seen how you've defended the charges of context, nor have I seen you defend that what happened back then doesn't apply to today. THIS is what SWH is looking for. With out this, me and other readers are left to conclude that Islam does teach violence. Here is an example of what I'm talking about....

In christianity, its been argued many times that in the OT, it says to stone to death anyone who works on the sabbath or to stone to death an adulterer, these are commands handed down by god to Moses. Christianity argues that they are not required to follow those parts of the laws and they can support this (barely) with claims that Jesus now pays for the sins of man. They are not required to follow the CIVIL laws (punishments) of the OT. They are still required to follow the Moral laws (don't cheat or work on sunday) but if they break these commandments (moral part of the law), they don't have to be stoned to death (the civil part of the law) because Jesus has already paid the price. So when atheists charge christians for picking and choosing which parts to follow or that they aren't true chrisitains if they don't stone people to death, they can at least defend their position.

This is what SWH is asking of you, give Quranic support that negates the other parts that you find objectionable (assuming you find beheadings and the likes objectionable). Support your claim that the old ways are not relevent to TODAYS Islam and refute why the Terrorists are "not true muslims". If you've followed Islam all your life you should be able to do this unless you're like most christians I know... who go to church once a week and never talk about or read the bible or know anything about what their bible says other than what the preacher tells them. Is this the kind of Muslim you are?

Show how SWH has taken any of these verses out of context. If you have done this already, please link me to post(s) that youve done this.

I'm pointing this all out to you because I want to learn. I'm TRYING my hardest to be toloerant of Muslims, I live very close to the largest Muslim community in the USA, and for the most part, they are respectful and tolerant of others. Maybe you can explain why the Muslims in the USA (for the most part) don't seem to be terrorists?

[Athena]

:) this is a marvelous thread. Sorry my life is so busy I don't have enough time to devout to it.

About the things Mohammed did. He was human right? As today, some humans have great insite, but still do human things that are less then worthy of wise men, so was it for Mohammed. As our consciousness is shaped by our time and place in history, so it was for Jesus and Mohammed. Mohammed's life was far from my idea of an ideal life, but then I am living in his time and place, so I have a completely different consciousness.

There were several ancient people's who strongly objected to the written word, and for good reason. Our holy books are perfect examples of the problem with the written word. The thoughts do not chance as we gain in knowing.

We can spend an eternity arguing with each other, and achieve nothing but unpleasant feelings. Or, :) we can learn of being human, and we can learn of history, and we can develop our knowledge of both. When we do this, our own personal lives seem so small and unimportant, while we identify more and more with the whole of humanity and a universal God who is far above these little squabbles humans engage themselves in.

We can use these debates to learn more of life and expand our minds, and this would be a good thing. However, thinking we hold truth because we study a holy book, and our truth means another person's truth is a falsehood we must defeat, because a jealous God so desires this is, human foolishness. It might make us feel important to God, but this limited knowledge is very limiting.

Like, let's get a grip. We have too much to learn, before our confidence in what we know is justified. There is no book in the world, that is complete and pure of human error. It is human error to claim any book can be the word of God and complete in all we need to know. Each one of the holy books, is restricted to a particular place and time in history, and the consciousness of those who put the thoughts in writing. If we want anything like God consciousness, we must learn all this history and know much about being human. And we must always check with our hearts. Truth is not just we think it, but also how we feel it. If we take care of our hearts, and right them with love, we will come closer to God. We must make ourselves the authority through much learning, and do not make our holy books, or church leaders, or even political leaders and technological experts, the authority over any more then the very limited expertise. This is the meaning of liberty and it is the way to reason and peace. This is the way of democracy, verses the way of religious dogma and religous leaders.

[The_Genius]

Quote by: ItsDarts Genius... I've been following this thread and have noticed that you have not addressed the quran quotes presented by SHW. Near the beginning of this thread, you mentioned "Context", and you've mentioned such things as "thats the way it was back then". So far I have not seen how you've defended the charges of context, nor have I seen you defend that what happened back then doesn't apply to today. THIS is what SWH is looking for. With out this, me and other readers are left to conclude that Islam does teach violence. Here is an example of what I'm talking about.... In christianity, its been argued many times that in the OT, it says to stone to death anyone who works on the sabbath or to stone to death an adulterer, these are commands handed down by god to Moses. Christianity argues that they are not required to follow those parts of the laws and they can support this (barely) with claims that Jesus now pays for the sins of man. They are not required to follow the CIVIL laws (punishments) of the OT. They are still required to follow the Moral laws (don't cheat or work on sunday) but if they break these commandments (moral part of the law), they don't have to be stoned to death (the civil part of the law) because Jesus has already paid the price. So when atheists charge christians for picking and choosing which parts to follow or that they aren't true chrisitains if they don't stone people to death, they can at least defend their position. This is what SWH is asking of you, give Quranic support that negates the other parts that you find objectionable (assuming you find beheadings and the likes objectionable). Support your claim that the old ways are not relevent to TODAYS Islam and refute why the Terrorists are "not true muslims". If you've followed Islam all your life you should be able to do this unless you're like most christians I know... who go to church once a week and never talk about or read the bible or know anything about what their bible says other than what the preacher tells them. Is this the kind of Muslim you are? Show how SWH has taken any of these verses out of context. If you have done this already, please link me to post(s) that youve done this. I'm pointing this all out to you because I want to learn. I'm TRYING my hardest to be toloerant of Muslims, I live very close to the largest Muslim community in the USA, and for the most part, they are respectful and tolerant of others. Maybe you can explain why the Muslims in the USA (for the most part) don't seem to be terrorists?

Good thing that you pointed it out....

Firstly, I have said many times that a terrorist is not a Muslim... He also quotes out of context (from the Quran) to justify his disgusting actions.

Secondly, many people on here have a mindset that has been shaped by the media...

The way it works...

You say, "Islam promotes terrorism and it's a fact, I know it. oh yes I know it. So genius, Prove me wrong if you can!"

The proper approach should be, "IS Islam a religion that promotes terrorism or it is misunderstood?"



Thridly, I am grateful you took your time to post that...Now I am more sure of what is expected of me and I promise by sunday, I will come up with something. (I have work during week days.)

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: Athena When we do this, our own personal lives seem so small and unimportant, while we identify more and more with the whole of humanity and a universal God who is far above these little squabbles humans engage themselves in.

ON the grand scale of the universe (or even just our own galaxy) our lives ARE insignificant. Only from our own perspective is lifge important. Earth (and everything on it) is nothing more than a single molecule in the grand scale of the universe. As far as any universal god is concerned, when there is evidence of this god that will convince EVERYONE on the planet that he/she/it exists, then and only then will I determine if this god is worthy of my worship. Until then, my default position is "god doesn'te exist until evidence says otherwise." I say this because even if there is a god who created the universe, it doesn't automatically mean he needs or even wants worship, let alone deserves it.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: TG Firstly, I have said many times that a terrorist is not a Muslim... He also quotes out of context (from the Quran) to justify his disgusting actions.

I'll look forward to this. I haven't seen it yet which is what I've been waiting for, for 3 pages of posts now.

There is no doubt in my mind that many peoples perception of Islam is driven by the media, but I don't see SWH's argument being driven by this. He said in the OP that his very argument could be applied to the Bible just as easily, and has been, and that it was just Islams turn to face the gauntlet.

You are being accused of the same thing Christians get accused of all the time. Cherry picking the part that appeal to you and making excuses for the parts that don't sound so good. The point in this line of debate is to convince people that you can defend this. Fundimentalist Christians, IMHO are just as crazy as terrorists. Fundies bomb abortion clinic, protest military funerals and they hate gay people, while conservative and moderate christians(not all) at the worst, only discriminate against various groups based on teachings of the bible. These people are also accused of cherry picking various parts of the bible and this has lead the the HUNDREDS of various christian sects. This is the same thing that has happened between Sunni and She'ite(sp?) muslims.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Athena, if you are not careful, you are going to be recognized as being too diplomatic and then drafted as a mod -- and then I would have to worry if you would be able to control yourself from exerting mod power into the debate. <smile>

Quote by: Athena About the things Mohammed did. He was human right? As today, some humans have great insite, but still do human things that are less then worthy of wise men, so was it for Mohammed. As our consciousness is shaped by our time and place in history, so it was for Jesus and Mohammed. Mohammed's life was far from my idea of an ideal life, but then I am living in his time and place, so I have a completely different consciousness.

So, are you saying torture and terrorism was good at some time in history? Yes, Muhammed was human, but can you say clearly and honestly from your heart that every thing he did was "good" or that?: "He did do some bad things and that Allah`s ordering of some of those bad things makes him guilty of doing bad, too, and therefore parts of Islam in its formation and spreading was carried out badly as it pertains to respect for life and freedom of choic."

If one is going to use time as an excuse for letting the bad slide, then anyone can use that for any particular time. One could say that the tortures America has done is ok because of the duress those soldiers were under at the time they did them. Or those who torture other Islamic sects in Iraq, the Sunni and Shia, could say their tortures are ok because at this time in their societies it is accepted as a means of handling their enemies. Therefore, those actors in those actions are not terrorists or torturors any more than Muhammed.

There were several ancient people's who strongly objected to the written word, and for good reason. Our holy books are perfect examples of the problem with the written word. The thoughts do not chance as we gain in knowing.

You have to clarify a little more on this for me to comment. Who were the ancient people and what precisely were their objections? Please provide us some source links so we, too, can look at what you are referencing on this point.

We can spend an eternity arguing with each other, and achieve nothing but unpleasant feelings. Or, :) we can learn of being human, and we can learn of history, and we can develop our knowledge of both.

I am a strong believer in learning from arguing in debate fashion. That is how juries learn who is guilty and who is not. Here, I am prosecuting.

We can use these debates to learn more of life and expand our minds, and this would be a good thing. However, thinking we hold truth because we study a holy book, and our truth means another person's truth is a falsehood we must defeat, because a jealous God so desires this is, human foolishness. It might make us feel important to God, but this limited knowledge is very limiting.

I agree. My God is better than your God has been a scourge for us. That is why many Free Thinkers who respect reason feel compelled to add their effort into helping reason away superstition and the Fairy God Kings that spring from them.

And we must always check with our hearts. Truth is not just we think it, but also how we feel it.

What you plead for is not the example Muhammed gave the world. You plead for understanding and tolerance, but Muhammed paints a different story. The word "Islam" itself is "to submit." Those who didn`t want to submit when Allah gave them a choice did not always fair to well. Are you saying you have found a better way to do things than Muhammed?

If we take care of our hearts, and right them with love, we will come closer to God. We must make ourselves the authority through much learning, and do not make our holy books, or church leaders, or even political leaders and technological experts, the authority over any more then the very limited expertise. This is the meaning of liberty and it is the way to reason and peace. This is the way of democracy, verses the way of religious dogma and religous leaders.

Agreed. But, I don`t see that to be consistant with the Koran or the many Hadith. I am wondering that you may be a bad Muslim [but good human] because you seem to say things that are shown to be contradictory to the holy Book(s) of Koran. Perhaps you are a Neo Muslim. Are Neo Muslims considered Muslims? I know that in the Islamic world the several different sects like to accuse the others of apostacy quite regularly. What percentage of the Islamic world would throw that term at you? And, apostics are not considered good Muslims, are they?

By the way, what does the term apostacy mean to you and who would you apply it to in today`s Islamic world?

[StrongHeartsWin]

Muslims refuse to see their beloved Prophet carrying out the wishes of Allah as anything other than good -- despite his recorded actions by his followers given down in the Hadith that show otherwise. Perhaps, many of them are just unaware of his torturing deeds, as many Westerners are. Burried in Hadith, I imagine his actions often go unexamined or uncommented on. If that is deliberate, then it is deception -- if it is known, but they refuse to acknowledge those, then it brings one to the road of shizophrenia.

Muhammed`s followers had heard rumor that the Jew, Kinnah had knowledge and access to a great treasure that was hidden. Muhammed demanded that that treasure be turned over to him. When questioned about it, Kinnah still maintained ignorance about it. What follows is not the act of a man professing a religion of love and mercy, but one of debased cruelty that one would expect from a Columbian drug ring or Mafia hit squad:

“The Prophet gave orders concerning Kinanah to Zubayr, saying, ‘Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah’s chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him.” From the Tabari VIII:122, Ishaq:515

Have you ever seen that old photo of the young black man in the South who was tortured and killed by the KKK with a fire smoldering on his stomach as he laid stretched out on the ground with ropes pullling his hands and feet tight? If you want to know what Muhammed`s work of torture looked like, just go to Google and start searching for it.

When is torture the mark of a great religion and its Prophet? Isn`t torture supposed to be the specialty of Satan? Looks like Muhammed and Satan have a mode of operati they share between them.

Or perhaps, we should redefine words to make us rationalize rather than reason? Shall we redefine “terrorism” to make terrorists not terrorists?

[ByaKya]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Have you ever seen that old photo of the young black man in the South who was tortured and killed by the KKK with a fire smoldering on his stomach as he laid stretched out on the ground with ropes pullling his hands and feet tight? If you want to know what Muhammed`s work of torture looked like, just go to Google and start searching for it.

What if i wanted to see that old photo of the young black man in the South who was tortured and killed by the KKK with a fire smoldering on his stomach as he laid stretched out on the ground with ropes pullling his hands and feet tight?
Can i say Clinton did it instead of muhamamd?

[ByaKya]

im gonna need links to those things you quote, because i cant find any outside of islamophobic sites.
i doubt they are real, and the ones that are, are taken out of context.
if you can only link me to sites selling sean hannity books, or clearly riechwing sites, then youre in for a rough ride

[ItsDarts]

Is there an online version of BibleGateway.com: A searchable online Bible in over 50 versions and 35 languages. for the Quran and Hadith? A tool like this would make things a lot easier for this debate. Then the reader could see/check for his self the context in which verses are being portrayed.

I've looked in the past and haven't found anything similar.

[ByaKya]

i dont think anything like that exists, for the sole reason that in a lot of places, an arabic version of the koran is around, even in mosques to clarify passages. They are obessed with innacuraies from translation

[MrAmmaaR]

There are few issues that lack clarity of perception to the real aims Islam promotes and to its message as a whole, First of which is poor comprehension to Islam's role as it preaches, I find them absurd the claims of 'intolerance' and 'vengefulness' promoted by Islam to subdue its enemies (namely: infidels), What do you think Islam is aiming to convey?, It's as it says a divine Message to make things clear , It does set clear divisions between what's GOOD and what's EVIL, It makes a distinction with crystal clarity between RIGHT and WRONG, And it does inform everyone of consequences of each, We aren't deprived our free will by this, We're rather given a divine guidance of HOW to use our free will to prosper, this is how Islam broadly speaks of itself through its teachings.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: MrAmmaaR There are few issues that lack clarity of perception to the real aims Islam promotes and to its message as a whole, First of which is poor comprehension to Islam's role as it preaches, I find them absurd the claims of 'intolerance' and 'vengefulness' promoted by Islam to subdue its enemies (namely: infidels), What do you think Islam is aiming to convey?, It's as it says a divine Message to make things clear , It does set clear divisions between what's GOOD and what's EVIL, It makes a distinction with crystal clarity between RIGHT and WRONG, And it does inform everyone of consequences of each, We aren't deprived our free will by this, We're rather given a divine guidance of HOW to use our free will to prosper, this is how Islam broadly speaks of itself through its teachings.

Then perhaps you can review the verses posted in this thread and show how there is no intolerance and vengfullness and/or show how they may be portrayed out of context? Otherwise I can only conclude that your post above is vapor. Also, how can this "devine book" only be understood if it's only left in Arabic? (if this is indeed the case) Did this god somehow want everyone in the world to learn arabic after he did the tower of bable thing mentioned in the OT?

[Athena]

"8:13 That is because they opposed Allah and His messenger. Whoso opposeth Allah and His messenger, (for him) lo! Allah is severe in punishment."

This is the same as the God in the Torah and Christian bible. I don't understand the point of this quote when separated out for Islam alone. Like most my arguements are with Christians who dominate in the US and insist we all believe in this God.

[StrongHeartsWin]

“The Prophet gave orders concerning Kinanah to Zubayr, saying, ‘Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah’s chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him.” From the Tabari VIII:122, Ishaq:515

The passage comes from Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hisham`s The Life of the Prophet of Allah which was translated by A. Guillaume and titled “The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah.” Oxford Univ. Press, 1955.

Kinanah`s torture can be cross referenced for corroberation here, where the Muslim view admits that it is reported by Ibn Ishaq. Their only way to dispute the torture is by saying it is reported only by Ibn Ishaq -- but that should be natural for he was the earliest chronicler of Muhammed`s life. However, Ibn Ishaq`s work, and later his work revised by Ibn Hisham is never rejected in whole.

Ibn Ishaq is known to be "the first to collect the accounts of the expeditions of the Messenger of Allah and record them," as corroberated by another early scholar of Islam, Ibn Sa`d.

The Sirat Rasul Allah is thought to be the oldest extant biography on Mohammed which was written prior to any major writings of Hadith. It`s tranlated works, The Life of Muhammed by Mr. Guillaume is considered one of the most complete works in translation available to Westerners.

The translated quote is listed on many sites, citing the page number it is taken from in the book. I have not found any sites refuting it, eventhough it is quoted widespread. Perhaps the passage is an embarrassing one that is hard to deal with. Silence may be telling. As said above, it can be corroberated in paraphrase form on wikipedia.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Athena This is the same as the God in the Torah and Christian bible. I don't understand the point of this quote when separated out for Islam alone. Like most my arguements are with Christians who dominate in the US and insist we all believe in this God.

But the debate is not one of comparison between the two. For one, I am the one who is debating it, and have been since creating the OP, from a non-Christian view, because, I, the one putting forth the argument am not a Christian -- so how can you expect me to give that point of yours any weight?

Ok, so I concede that fictional BGod is bad. Ok, that side of the equation is settled. Now, the side left standing to be taken care of is the KGod. It is bad (i.e. Schizophrenic and deceptive) standing in its representation of Islam.

One side of the equation does not permit or excuse another side -- or else we would have little Johny jumping off the bridge merely because Tom did so. Each Book are accountable for themselves and you cannot say they are the same God because many Christians will not agree with you on that, so why should we? -- unless you are willing to admit both books are works of fiction for us trying to understand and put a face to a generic God. Is that what you are saying?

[Athena]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Athena, if you are not careful, you are going to be recognized as being too diplomatic and then drafted as a mod -- and then I would have to worry if you would be able to control yourself from exerting mod power into the debate. <smile> So, are you saying torture and terrorism was good at some time in history? Yes, Muhammed was human, but can you say clearly and honestly from your heart that every thing he did was "good" or that?: "He did do some bad things and that Allah`s ordering of some of those bad things makes him guilty of doing bad, too, and therefore parts of Islam in its formation and spreading was carried out badly as it pertains to respect for life and freedom of choic." If one is going to use time as an excuse for letting the bad slide, then anyone can use that for any particular time. One could say that the tortures America has done is ok because of the duress those soldiers were under at the time they did them. Or those who torture other Islamic sects in Iraq, the Sunni and Shia, could say their tortures are ok because at this time in their societies it is accepted as a means of handling their enemies. Therefore, those actors in those actions are not terrorists or torturors any more than Muhammed. You have to clarify a little more on this for me to comment. Who were the ancient people and what precisely were their objections? Please provide us some source links so we, too, can look at what you are referencing on this point. I am a strong believer in learning from arguing in debate fashion. That is how juries learn who is guilty and who is not. Here, I am prosecuting. I agree. My God is better than your God has been a scourge for us. That is why many Free Thinkers who respect reason feel compelled to add their effort into helping reason away superstition and the Fairy God Kings that spring from them. What you plead for is not the example Muhammed gave the world. You plead for understanding and tolerance, but Muhammed paints a different story. The word "Islam" itself is "to submit." Those who didn`t want to submit when Allah gave them a choice did not always fair to well. Are you saying you have found a better way to do things than Muhammed? Agreed. But, I don`t see that to be consistant with the Koran or the many Hadith. I am wondering that you may be a bad Muslim [but good human] because you seem to say things that are shown to be contradictory to the holy Book(s) of Koran. Perhaps you are a Neo Muslim. Are Neo Muslims considered Muslims? I know that in the Islamic world the several different sects like to accuse the others of apostacy quite regularly. What percentage of the Islamic world would throw that term at you? And, apostics are not considered good Muslims, are they? By the way, what does the term apostacy mean to you and who would you apply it to in today`s Islamic world?

thank you for starting my day with a laugh. Have found a better way of doing things than Mohammed. Mohammed was pretty much like Genghis Khan and Attilla the Hum and no way am I like these men.

Didn't others contribute to the Quran? Muslims are divided between those who follow the Calphs and those who hate them.

If one is going to use time as an excuse for letting the bad slide, then anyone can use that for any particular time.

How human beings treat time is extremely important. At first the Romans did accept Christianity as a religion, because it was new. We have a tradition of common law, because these laws are old. I am saying the age of our concepts, plays into the "authority" we give them. Especially when societies experience rapid change, some cling to the past. So a few things play into preserving the past.

By the way, what does the term apostacy mean to you and who would you apply it to in today`s Islamic world?

Why exclude Jews and Christians who also have factions that just as caught up in this religious problem? Fundamentalism is part of all religions.

Some Muslim cultures have not modernized, and they use a book that freezes human history in the time it was written. Both the Christian bible and Quran have stories of doing things like stoning people, and exiling the sick. In cultures that are still very much as they were, how much should we expect them to be different? Worse for them is, the pressure to change, which causes a clinging to the past. The concept of apostacy plays into this fear of change that is exasperated by the pressure to change.

What does it mean to submit to Allah/God? Human consciousness changes and Christians have given up stoning people. Islam is about 1300 years old, when Christianity was 1300 years old, there was the Inquistion known for its intolerance and torture. Thankful Christians are no longer looking for witches and have stopped torturing women to make them confess to being witches. It is abhorrent for us to do what seemed perfectly reasonable and necessary in the past. The problem is inherent with religion, and it was not Christianity that made the US great, but democracy. Democracy, when fully understood, drives us to know truth through the scientific method, and to give up old notions such as demons possessing people. Democracy and religion are not exactly compatable, because religion clings to the past, and superstitious notions, and democracy moves into the future, and sheds superstition. When religious people move into the future, they have to right this with their understanding of God/Allah's will. But please, don't pick solely on Muslims, because the problem is not just Islam. Christians have done their torturing and their persectuions and warring too. If our bellies were not so full and we became fearful, many would cling to this punishing God and ideas of how to make this God stop the punishment. Christian countries today are pleasant, not because of the religion, but because of their full bellies and sense of power.

This moment in time would be so much better if we were all working with a better understanding of humanity.

[The_Genius]

StrongHeartsWin, you are trying very hard to make Mohammed (saw) look like a torturer on each one of your anti-Islamic topics.... But It's not really working...


1. You are completely ignoring (or may be you don't know) the fact that Mohammed (saw) was not just the leader in a spiritual level but also secular or Judicial level. Just because he was a Prophet you can not expect him to say, "Lord have mercy, you are forgiven'' to a ruthless gang of murderers.


2. You are also ignoring the extent of crime they have committed...

(a) They killed an unarmed and innocent shepherd.

(b) They drank milk from his camels but the shepherd had to pay for the milk with his own life.

(c) They drove away the camels... The Sheperd's family not only lost him but also their source of income (camels).


and you are talking about "human rights" because Mohammed (saw) punished the murderers?

Did the shepherd not have a right to live?