Joined: 29-Aug-2005
Location: Saudi Arabia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
QuoteReplyTopic: Islam and The World Posted: 06-Jan-2006 at 02:59
Originally posted by Maju
On a particular note, ok Ge, do you mean that, as obviously the LRA (which, btw, is financed and supported by the barbaric Islamist dictatorship of Sudan and no one else) can hardly be considered a Christian sect, we should not consider Sudan or the Taliban or the Iran of the aytollahs or the fundamentalist Saudi Monarchy as Islamic at all either?
What would you consider good clear examples of what Islam actually is? The Sufis?
Maju, I don't believe there is an example of Islam per se. There is no kingdom of god on this earth and this is should be well known to most Muslims (at least Sunnis). Rather, we have a spectrum where a country, nation, group can be placed on. That spectrum decides how much do you follow Islam and how much you don't, and so you are to be considered more islamic or not, and not an Islamic or not. For example, Saudi Arabia practice more Islamic laws than Tunisia, however Saudi Arabia does not practice Islamic concepts of equality sometimes including not seperating the judicial system from the state, neither it does with the Royal family expidentures and the corruptions. So it is more Islamic on one side but less Islamic on the other side.
Now going back to your question, Talibans, Iran, Saudi Arabia...etc cannot be examples of an Islamic state rather than how much they follow the Islamic teachings in all aspects and not selectively.
The LRA has a religious propoganda, not very different from Taliban. If we ought to consider Taliban an Islamic terrorist group, we should consider then the LRA a Christian terrorist group to avoid double-standing. If the LRA received assistance from the Sudanese government earlier, Osama Bin Laden and much of Taliban received assistant from the USA too.
"The LRA is based in southern Sudan and operates in northern Uganda. In January 2002 Pres. Museveni and Sudanese President Umar Haan al-Bashir pledged to work towards peace and security in the region and to cease military support to rebel groups. In 1995 the two countries severed diplomatic relations with Uganda has accusing Sudan of supporting the LRA, and Sudan has claiming that Uganda was assisting the rebel Sudan Peoples Liberation Army (SPLA)."
So it is clearly a political move as much as the United States did earlier in supporting Taliban, and till now, in supporting the Saudi Royal family. Politics is different issue to religion.
Originally posted by Maju
People of all the world have followed with horror accounts of how women particularly are treated under Sharia laws and associated customs.
I don't recall any law that is targetting women only and not both sexes. Do you mean how some Muslims treat their women?
I can tell you that a lot of Muslim men are not following the examples they have in their religion in respecting and equal treatment of their wives and sisters. However, a lot of Christian are also not following the Christian teachings in treating their women too, except that Christian teaching of women is quiet different than what you expect.
'A women should learn in quietness and in full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.' (1 Timothy 2:11-15)
No wonder they were discussing in the 1000's AD if women are evil spirits in human bodies or full human!
While childbearing has beeen discussed by many Christian theologians as a punishment to Eve and all women in decieving Adam (men), the Prophet Muhammed tells a guy asking who are the most deserving person of my care and obidience, and he tells him "Your mother", he askes "then whom?", and he get the same answer second and a thrid time too. Finally "your father" comes in the fourth time. 3-1 for mothers.
So Maju, you deciding that you can find horrific accounts of ordering the mistreating of women in Quran but at the same time you cannot find that in the Bible is untrue simply.
Edited by ok ge
D.J. Kaufman
Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk.
To your response, Cok Gec, to Maju's statement in reference to the treatment of women in Shariah law, I would like to add:
How much do you know about Shariah law, Maju? I, as a Muslim woman,
can guarantee you that my rights are well protected by Shariah, if not
more. The practice of Muslims does not speak of Islamic values, just
like the child-abuse, and domestic violence widespread in the West
certainly does not speak of Western proclaimed values. Right?
If you are in doubt of how Shariah law treats women, and do not have
access to the original sources, you can ask Muslim women to speak for
themselves.
People of all the world have followed with
horror accounts of how women particularly are treated under Sharia laws
and associated customs.
I don't recall any law that is targetting women only and not both
sexes. Do you mean how some Muslims treat their women?
No I mean stoning of women for supposed adultery which is in most
case just rape. I mean Amina Lawal, I mean the burka, I mean women not
being able to drive in Saudi Arabia. Those are legal precepts under
several "sharias".
I can tell you that a lot of Muslim men are not following
the examples they have in their religion in respecting and equal
treatment of their wives and sisters. However, a lot of Christian are
also not following the Christian teachings in treating their women too,
except that Christian teaching of women is quiet different than what
you expect.
'A women
should learn in quietness and in full submission. I do not permit a
woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For
Adam was formed first, and then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived;
it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.' (1 Timothy 2:11-15)
That's not a Gospel, it's not "the word of God" but just that of
Paul, the man who perverted the Christian doctrine - in opinion of so
many.
No wonder they were discussing in the 1000's AD if women are evil spirits in human bodies or full human!
While childbearing has beeen discussed by many Christian theologians
as a punishment to Eve and all women in decieving Adam (men), the
Prophet Muhammed tells a guy asking who are the most deserving person
of my care and obidience, and he tells him "Your mother", he askes
"then whom?", and he get the same answer second and a thrid time too.
Finally "your father" comes in the fourth time. 3-1 for mothers.
So Maju, you deciding that you can find horrific accounts of
ordering the mistreating of women in Quran but at the same time you
cannot find that in the Bible is untrue simply.
But you will hardly find Jesus' words that are mysoginic. He may be
critizied as racist (for instance in the curing of the Syrian, when
it's compared to a dog) but not as mysoginic, at least for what I know.
And I hate to defend Christianity. But if you want a doctrine that
isn't stupidly obsessed with commandments and rituals, the Gospels fit
that. But you have to discard all the peripheric stuff: the Jewish Old
Testament and the parts of the New Testament that don't directly deal
with Jesus' "life and miracles". When Christians want to be hateful or
dogmatic then they quote Paul or the Book of Numbers but when they mean
to be lovable and tolerant, then they directly quote Jesus.
The main problem of Christians is that they aren't coherent.
Thank you Mira for your short but highly-benificial post.
Originally posted by Maju
No I mean stoning of women for supposed adultery which is in most case just rape. I mean Amina Lawal, I mean the burka, I mean women not being able to drive in Saudi Arabia. Those are legal precepts under several "sharias".
Ok, I was expecting you to use this example, that is why I said my statement "do you mean a law that targets both sexes?" Though stonning to death for adultery is disputed between Muslims and we have talked about it at AE three times at least (go back to old posts for details), Also, those states that practice this law on all citizens do practice it on proven cases and not on rape cases as you claimed. You cannot use this example to point out Women oppression because simply those states that practice such a punishment have the verdict of law on both sexes. Both married sexes who commit adultery are expected to receive the same punishment. So this example does not work in supporting your argument.
Women not being able to drive in Saudi Arabia is not part of Shariah and those scholars who decided such a decision will not be able to point one statement in the Quran or the Hadith is support of their decision. Rather they used the notion that if women were to drive, they will be out driving, and if they were out driving, they might be attacked, raped..etc They call this Qiyas and Jame' or measurement and consensus where laws can be passed by measuring or having a consensus. So obviously it is not a scripture order at all and definitely not in the Quran as you claimed.
As you see it is a twisted logic and interpretation and not surprisingly only Saudi Arabia of the whole Muslim world practice this. I expect such a law to be nolified and cancelled by no more than 20 years from now.
Originally posted by Maju
And I hate to defend Christianity. But if you want a doctrine that isn't stupidly obsessed with commandments and rituals, the Gospels fit that. But you have to discard all the peripheric stuff: the Jewish Old Testament and the parts of the New Testament that don't directly deal with Jesus' "life and miracles". When Christians want to be hateful or dogmatic then they quote Paul or the Book of Numbers but when they mean to be lovable and tolerant, then they directly quote Jesus.
and I hate to look like an attacker on Christianity, but Im just following the flow of your argument. Let us clean the Gospel out of all the indirect statement of Jesus Peace Be Upon Him and leaves his "direct quote". What will you get? 10 pages Gospel maybe? Also since you are raised in a Christian society, I assume automatically that you already know that this Paul you call his quotes hateful and dogmatic, is considered generally the real founder of Christianity. You calling Paul words not God word, means they are man words simply Maju, thus destroying the whole concept of the holy spirit revelation. So if Paul words are not God word, then this also should apply to all books including Matthew, Luke, John, Mark...etc
Islam oppsessed with commandments and rituals? Do you mean Sunnahs? When you are advised how to eat, how to dress, what to say, these are recommendations and not obligations called "Sunnahs". If you think that Islam is oppsessed with rituals, what is wrong with this anyhow? Does anyone here object to Bhuddist monks who practice rituals 24 hours a day? eating only one meal a day? chanting all day long?
So praying 5 times a day where each prayer takes you 10 minutes, so a total of 50 minutes in your whole day is too much? Let us double it to an hour and 40 minutes a day in total. Does this bother anyone here? I prefer spending this time in spritual solitude or reflections rather than setting and watching TV with a beer in my hand.
Edited by ok ge
D.J. Kaufman
Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk.
When I hear Islam, I think of God or Allah (subhanahu wa ta'la), the prophets and their lives, the mosques, the millions and millions of believing men and women, simplicity in pratice and belief, faith, morals, equality and spiritual reward.
As for those who are so quick in accusing Muslims, Islam, Muhammad or the Qur'an, I ask you, what do you think when you hear Israel? or Vatican? or USA? or KKK? or Zionism? or Srebenica?
I tell you what I think, I think of bloodshed, intolerance, racism, hypocrisy, money and hatred.
At this time, an old woman approached the crowd, but was pushed back. Then Issa said, "Reverence Woman, mother of the universe,' in her lies the truth of creation. She is the foundation of all that is good and beautiful. She is the source of life and death. Upon her depends the existence of man, because she is the sustenance of his labors. She gives birth to you in travail, she watches over your growth. Bless her. Honor her. Defend her. Love your wives and honor them, because tomorrow they shall be mothers, and later-progenitors of a whole race. Their love ennobles man, soothes the embittered heart and tames the beast. Wife and mother-they are the adornments of the universe."
"As light divides itself from darkness, so does woman possess the gift to divide in man good intent from the thought of evil. Your best thoughts must belong to woman. Gather from them your moral strength, which you must possess to sustain your near ones. Do not humiliate her, for therein you will humiliate yourselves. And all which you will do to mother, to wife, to widow or to another woman in sorrow-that shall you also do for the Spirit."
I mean women not being able to drive in Saudi Arabia. Those are legal precepts under several "sharias".
Havent read his response, but women in Saudi Arabia wear face covers generally, which reduces their peripheral vision. To be honest, i'd have second thoughts about letting them drive, since peripheral vision is important for driving. Also from what I know, it's only Saudi that stop women from driving.
Edited by TeldeIndus
We are not without accomplishment. We have managed to distribute poverty - Nguyen Co Thatch, Vietnamese foreign minister
I mean women not being able to drive in Saudi Arabia. Those are legal precepts under several "sharias".
Havent read his response, but women in Saudi Arabia wear face
covers generally, which reduces their peripheral vision. To be honest,
i'd have second thoughts about letting them drive, since
peripheral vision is important for driving. Also from what I know,
it's only Saudi that stop women from driving.
Well the compulsory covers are also shameful and impractical. They need
a Leninist regime for some generations - I'm quite possitive about
that.
As for those who are so quick in accusing Muslims, Islam, Muhammad
or the Qur'an, I ask you, what do you think when you hear Israel? or
Vatican? or USA? or KKK? or Zionism? or Srebenica?
Txungo material. Bad things, of course.
One thing doesn't contradict the other: I am agains Nazism and Zionism
for about the same reasons I am against Sharia. Hope you get the
point...
I am for human rights and for wide freedoms, intelectual, social,
sexual and of any other kind. I am also for equality, including gender
equality. I am againts all kind of authoritarism, wether it is
Christian, Jew, Muslim or even secularist... I think that everyone has
the right to follow their beliefs but that such personal stuff should
not extend to society, which must be secular and secularist, so
everyone, wether majority or minority can enjoy his/her rights fully.
On a particular note, ok Ge, do you mean that, as obviously the LRA (which, btw, is financed and supported by the barbaric Islamist dictatorship of Sudan and no one else) can hardly be considered a Christian sect, we should not consider Sudan or the Taliban or the Iran of the aytollahs or the fundamentalist Saudi Monarchy as Islamic at all either?
What would you consider good clear examples of what Islam actually is? The Sufis?
Maju, I don't believe there is an example of Islam per se. There is no kingdom of god on this earth and this is should be well known to most Muslims (at least Sunnis). Rather, we have a spectrum where a country, nation, group can be placed on. That spectrum decides how much do you follow Islam and how much you don't, and so you are to be considered more islamic or not, and not an Islamic or not. For example, Saudi Arabia practice more Islamic laws than Tunisia, however Saudi Arabia does not practice Islamic concepts of equality sometimes including not seperating the judicial system from the state, neither it does with the Royal family expidentures and the corruptions. So it is more Islamic on one side but less Islamic on the other side.
Now going back to your question, Talibans, Iran, Saudi Arabia...etc cannot be examples of an Islamic state rather than how much they follow the Islamic teachings in all aspects and not selectively.
The LRA has a religious propoganda, not very different from Taliban. If we ought to consider Taliban an Islamic terrorist group, we should consider then the LRA a Christian terrorist group to avoid double-standing. If the LRA received assistance from the Sudanese government earlier, Osama Bin Laden and much of Taliban received assistant from the USA too.
"The LRA is based in southern Sudan and operates in northern Uganda. In January 2002 Pres. Museveni and Sudanese President Umar Haan al-Bashir pledged to work towards peace and security in the region and to cease military support to rebel groups. In 1995 the two countries severed diplomatic relations with Uganda has accusing Sudan of supporting the LRA, and Sudan has claiming that Uganda was assisting the rebel Sudan Peoples Liberation Army (SPLA)."
So it is clearly a political move as much as the United States did earlier in supporting Taliban, and till now, in supporting the Saudi Royal family. Politics is different issue to religion.
Originally posted by Maju
People of all the world have followed with horror accounts of how women particularly are treated under Sharia laws and associated customs.
I don't recall any law that is targetting women only and not both sexes. Do you mean how some Muslims treat their women?
I can tell you that a lot of Muslim men are not following the examples they have in their religion in respecting and equal treatment of their wives and sisters. However, a lot of Christian are also not following the Christian teachings in treating their women too, except that Christian teaching of women is quiet different than what you expect.
'A women should learn in quietness and in full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.' (1 Timothy 2:11-15)
No wonder they were discussing in the 1000's AD if women are evil spirits in human bodies or full human!
While childbearing has beeen discussed by many Christian theologians as a punishment to Eve and all women in decieving Adam (men), the Prophet Muhammed tells a guy asking who are the most deserving person of my care and obidience, and he tells him "Your mother", he askes "then whom?", and he get the same answer second and a thrid time too. Finally "your father" comes in the fourth time. 3-1 for mothers.
So Maju, you deciding that you can find horrific accounts of ordering the mistreating of women in Quran but at the same time you cannot find that in the Bible is untrue simply.
Hmm...muslims trying to quote the Bible! AAHHH! Whats next!
-No but on a serious note you have used this scripture way out of context. In the book of Timothy Paul is writing the young believer(it states "genuine child in the faith") Timothy on ways that he should be familiar with when inside the congregation:
1 Timothy 3:14-15
I am writing you these things, though I am hoping to come to you shortly, but in case I am delayed, that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in God's household, which is the congregation of [the] living God, a pillar and support of the truth.
-A couple of other verses that were right before the verses you posted:
1 Timothy 2:8-10
Therefore I desire that in every place the men carry on prayer, lifting up loyal hand, apart from wrath and debates. Likewise I desire the women to adorn themselves in well arranged dress, with modesty and soundness fo mind, not with styles of hairbraiding and gold or pearls or very expensive garb, but in the way that befits women professing to reverence God, namely, through good works.
-So you see Paul is explaining in the following text(the one you have quoted) that women should not be teachers of the congregation and should thus just learn in silence(meaning not to profess or teach). Something that I would agree with at the time seeing as how there were no female teachers of any religion at that time, at least to my knowledge. Not in any way is Paul reffering to the stoning of women is he? Something that is in Islamic doctrine. Also in the Bible it refers to such things as men being the head of the household. I also too believe that the man should be at the head of the household as well as at the head of the congregation. The Bible does not teach superiority over women, but it does definately state the differences in their makeup and their general character and leadership skills. Both sexes are seen as equal and essential, they just play different roles.
Why Islam implies only arabs and sand and domed architecture in your brains?
How about Turks???
Turks are not living in desert,we dont wear burka or turban,and we dont have domed architecture neither....It seems that you are all orientalist prejudicers!
It was the Islamic cultures that saved many of the classical texts when most of Europe was in a so-called dark age
I think that the Arabs have left behind a solid foundation for the generations ahead. But FYI Umar (Rathia Allaho Anho) ordered the library of Alexandria burnt to the ground. The Arabs after Islam were great people. But they never learned to form a government and an impire until they moved to Baghdad and adobted many of the persian culture. There they really contributed to humanity
Arabs contributed to humanity... can i ask you how?
I voted for other. I don't really think of anything in particular when
I hear the word "Islam". I just perk up, knowing it relates to me. If
the discussion is bad, I get defensive - if it's good, I don't really
respond at all - if it's interesting, I'll comment, etc.
But it depends on the conversation, nothing really just comes to mind for me except...well, "listen".
Sorry to say this but when I hear Islam I think of terrorism and especially 9/11.
Just curiosity, why noone remember christianity as serbs and their genocide?
It looks like you are not looking Islam neutral, so you prefer to see what is bad in Islam. But you dont look christianity like this way.
The war was not a war of christianity. It was a war between the 2 peoples. This "war" on the USA is a islamic jihad on the west. So they are different.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum