Does the Quran promote peaceful values? (I claim it does not.)

[svirk]

svirk -

How about you stopping with personal attacks? And how about you stop calling me a liar?

As I said earlier, "Are you dishonest or ignorant or is it that you actually misunderstand the verses?" I have seen enough of your type, who know next to nothing, making grand claims against the faith of others.

It appears that you haven't read my posts carefully. I read the book, I took notes. I NEVER CLAIMED to be an Islamic scholar. What I've been saying is that I read it like a normal person would read it.

A normal person would have read the two verses in order and come to the only reasonable conclusion possible. Yet, somehow, you continue to insist on your deluded understanding. Crazy, really.

I find this verse to be ambiguous.

Only because your mind is clouded with bias against Islam. The verses in question seem fairly clear to me and every other person I have had to enlighten about the subject. I have debated this topic many times, once even with a group of openly hostile atheists and not one of them tried to pretend the verses were ambiguous. They initially used the same tactic as you, unwittingly quoting one verse without knowledge of the next one. When I pointed it out they, for the most part, conceded the point or ignored it and moved to a different line of attack. You are the first person I have seen try to continue the self-deception. (The debate I mentioned is still available on the internet somewhere and took place in the usenet group alt.atheism.moderated way back sometime I don't remember)

Perhaps good, but perhaps there is room for an aggressive interpretation.

"...man is, above all else, always given to contention." Quran 18:45

 

[icehorse]

svirk,

If you feel you're on solid ground here, I think you'd be able to stop with the personal attacks and directly speak to the interpretations I provided.

Tell me how I parsed those sentences incorrectly?

The words are the words.

 

[gnostic]

any religion that promote patriarchal society or patriarchal ideology (eg only men can be heads of the household, or only men can be breadwinners, or women must obeyed their husbands) - so not just Islam - can never promote peace.

any religion that promote they are" the only true religion", can never promote peace.

any religion, for example, in which they (like Muslims) should have more rights over non-Muslim citizens, then there can be no peace.

all three of the above examples, only promote inequality, injustice and intolerance.

 

[Sabour]

any religion that promote patriarchal society or patriarchal ideology (eg only men can be heads of the household, or only men can be breadwinners, or women must obeyed their husbands) - so not just Islam - can never promote peace.

any religion that promote they are" the only true religion", can never promote peace.

any religion, for example, in which they (like Muslims) should have more rights over non-Muslim citizens, then there can be no peace.

all three of the above examples, only promote inequality, injustice and intolerance.

I suggest you take a deeper look at Islam friend.

 

[icehorse]

I suggest you take a deeper look at Islam friend.

Hi One-answer,

As a non-believer, having read the Quran (and taking it at face value), and watching all the troubles of the world, how would you like me to think about groups like Boko Haram?

It seems to me they can easily defend their actions based on what's in the Quran? It also seems to me that they can easily point to the life of Muhammad as inspiration for their actions.

How should an outsider decide whether Boko Haram's interpretation of Islam is more or less correct than your interpretation of Islam?

 

[Sabour]

Hi One-answer,

As a non-believer, having read the Quran (and taking it at face value), and watching all the troubles of the world, how would you like me to think about groups like Boko Haram?

It seems to me they can easily defend their actions based on what's in the Quran? It also seems to me that they can easily point to the life of Muhammad as inspiration for their actions.

How should an outsider decide whether Boko Haram's interpretation of Islam is more or less correct than your interpretation of Islam?

Hello Icehorse.

First, I don't address what certain groups are doing, I discuss the material itself.


Second, I had a conversation with you before and I highly doubt your intentions behind such conversations. The way I see it, you seem to have a massive need of proving Quraan is not peaceful. Whenever beauty of Quraan starts showing, you start saying well yeah you already have that, you don't need the Quraan to do it.

The way I see it is that you approach this with blind eyes and I think you are choosing to do so.

Sorry if I offended you, I speak things the way I see them.

I know I may be wrong, for that reason I don't want to hold a conversation with you because I may not be just in my conversation because my point of view may be wrong.

 

[icehorse]

Hi One-answer,

I understand if you don't want to discuss it further. But I'd like to address this point:

First, I don't address what certain groups are doing, I discuss the material itself.

If you take this orientation, you are shutting out the rest of the world. You are placing yourself in a separate, theoretical space, removed from day to day realities. Of course this is your choice to make, but it strikes me as a very selfish approach.

 

[Sabour]

Hi One-answer,

I understand if you don't want to discuss it further. But I'd like to address this point:



If you take this orientation, you are shutting out the rest of the world. You are placing yourself in a separate, theoretical space, removed from day to day realities. Of course this is your choice to make, but it strikes me as a very selfish approach.

It is the other way round.

One evaluates a car by its quality, not by the driver. The driver may be a bad driver. See my signature also. It would say much.

 

[icehorse]

I disagree. One evaluates a car's quality by how easy it is for people to use safely. If many people misunderstand a *thing*, the blame falls on the design of the *thing*, not the people.

For example, if a company designs a new cell phone, but no one can figure out how to use it, the company will fail. It doesn't matter how great the phone is in other regards - if people can't use it, it will fail.

Boko Haram did not write the Quran. The Taliban did not write the Quran. They are all *using* the Quran however, and the way they use it is radically different than the way you do.

I understand that Muslims believe the Quran contains the perfect words from Allah. But if we can suspend that belief for just a moment, the evidence in the world is that - from a modern perspective - the Quran is badly designed. It's far too easy for many, many violent people, to find support for their actions in this book.

 

[Sabour]

I disagree. One evaluates a car's quality by how easy it is for people to use safely. If many people misunderstand a *thing*, the blame falls on the design of the *thing*, not the people.

For example, if a company designs a new cell phone, but no one can figure out how to use it, the company will fail. It doesn't matter how great the phone is in other regards - if people can't use it, it will fail.

Boko Haram did not write the Quran. The Taliban did not write the Quran. They are all *using* the Quran however, and the way they use it is radically different than the way you do.

I understand that Muslims believe the Quran contains the perfect words from Allah. But if we can suspend that belief for just a moment, the evidence in the world is that - from a modern perspective - the Quran is badly designed. It's far too easy for many, many violent people, to find support for their actions in this book.

So, you decided to evaluate the quality by observing the adherents.

How about you get into the car and evaluate it yourself instead of saying look at this driver or look at that.

You have failed to address my example and You just said the same thing in a different way. So again.

Judge a car by its quality, don't judge the quality by observing the driver, because the driver could be a BAD driver.

 

[icehorse]

Judge a car by its quality, don't judge the quality by observing the driver, because the driver could be a BAD driver.

Let's say we have two models of car A and B. Let's say that 1000 people buy model A and 1000 people bu model B.

Now let's say that in the first year:
- 100 people crash their model A car,
- 10 people crash their model B car.

Most designers would be suspicious of the model A car, they wouldn't point fingers at the 2000 drivers.

 

[Sabour]

Let's say we have two models of car A and B. Let's say that 1000 people buy model A and 1000 people bu model B.

Now let's say that in the first year:
- 100 people crash their model A car,
- 10 people crash their model B car.

Most designers would be suspicious of the model A car, they wouldn't point fingers at the 2000 drivers.

Well you can't see my point behind my example. I was pointing out by my example that not all muslims are actually practicing Islam.

You are judging a religion to people who are born as muslim instead of people who actually choose Islam. That is what I meant between a good driver and a bad driver.

So your example doesn't work, the person who actually buys the car really wants the car because he is sacrificing money. The person who is a muslim and you are judging Islam based on his actions may be just born into it and doesn't care about it.

This is the point where you greatly fail to see things.

I don't like to say this story but I know some one who came to Islam that said I am glad that I was introduced to Islam before I was introduced to muslims.

I don't agree with that, I don't think there are muslims that bad, but I am just quoting this to make my point clear.

 

[icehorse]

Hi One-answer,

You said:

Well you can't see my point behind my example. I was pointing out by my example that not all muslims are actually practicing Islam.

I think you make an important point!

One problem is that - in the wide world - there is no agreement as to what "Islam" is. As you and I have talked, I might say "I wish most Muslims viewed Islam the way that One-answer views Islam"

But if I was discussing this with an extreme Muslim terrorist, he might very well believe that *he* is the one actually practicing Islam.

Who's right, you or the terrorist? If you're right, how can you prove it?

It is this very problem that made me start this thread.

 

[Sabour]

Hi One-answer,

You said:

I think you make an important point!

One problem is that - in the wide world - there is no agreement as to what "Islam" is. As you and I have talked, I might say "I wish most Muslims viewed Islam the way that One-answer views Islam"

But if I was discussing this with an extreme Muslim terrorist, he might very well believe that *he* is the one actually practicing Islam.

Who's right, you or the terrorist? If you're right, how can you prove it?

It is this very problem that made me start this thread.

And I also said get into the car and try yourself why didnt you address that? This answers your part of who is the right.

You are too much worrying about why you created a thread an why this is this and why that is that that you forgot the purpose of creating the thread in the first place.

You claim that you want to see how one would view the Quraan, the next thing you do is compare and contrast between what I would view and what other person would view.

It is like saying no you are wrong, you had the wrong message portrayed.


Everytime one tries to move forward with you you drag him back to the starting point.

I suggest you stop doing that.

 

[icehorse]

Hello One-answer,

The thread is called: "Does the Quran promote peaceful values? (I claim it does not.)"

Let me give you an analogy: Suppose a man goes through his entire life living in peace, raising a loving family, contributing to his community and so on... And then one day he goes into the world and does something horrible. (Maybe he sets the school on fire.) In most societies, if this man is caught, he will go to trial and when he is convicted, he will go to prison.

Society has decided that a lifetime of good acts can be wiped away by a single bad act. That man will be called a criminal.

Likewise, the Muslims in this thread have listed a few positive verses from the Quran. And I agree that the Quran DOES contain *some* peaceful verses.

But Muslims hold this book up to be perfect! If we apply the same logic to judging the Quran as we do a man, then we must conclude that the Quran is not a peaceful book.

My claim is that it is a violent book with some peaceful passages included. As we judge each other, we can judge this book. It's peaceful messages are wiped away by it's violent messages.

We would never say: "Bob's a peaceful guy, he only murders someone once a year". Why don't we use the same approach when looking at scripture?

_____________
defend net neutrality - "without love in the game, insanity's king"

 

[Sabour]

Hello One-answer,

The thread is called: "Does the Quran promote peaceful values? (I claim it does not.)"

Let me give you an analogy: Suppose a man goes through his entire life living in peace, raising a loving family, contributing to his community and so on... And then one day he goes into the world and does something horrible. (Maybe he sets the school on fire.) In most societies, if this man is caught, he will go to trial and when he is convicted, he will go to prison.

Society has decided that a lifetime of good acts can be wiped away by a single bad act. That man will be called a criminal.

Likewise, the Muslims in this thread have listed a few positive verses from the Quran. And I agree that the Quran DOES contain *some* peaceful verses.

But Muslims hold this book up to be perfect! If we apply the same logic to judging the Quran as we do a man, then we must conclude that the Quran is not a peaceful book.

My claim is that it is a violent book with some peaceful passages included. As we judge each other, we can judge this book. It's peaceful messages are wiped away by it's violent messages.

We would never say: "Bob's a peaceful guy, he only murders someone once a year". Why don't we use the same approach when looking at scripture?

Considering that I discussed this matter with you before and I presented you with how getting things out of context to make Quraan say something that it actually doesn't, I won't address that again. Because you will probably change the subject, like you did the last time.

Quraan is the most peaceful book on earth. You claim it is not, but it is.

 

[icehorse]

Hi One-answer,

I'd like you to try to empathize with someone who comes to Quran with an open mind and sits down to read the book. You probably don't remember the time when the Quran was not a big part of your life, but try to imagine an adult (or teenager), reading this book for the first time...

On the one hand, right from the beginning, the book claims that Allah is merciful. But within the first few pages, readers become frightened. Within the first few pages there is much discussion of Hellfire and the fate of nonbelievers. From the very first verse it is clear that the *merciful Allah* will always be angry with those people who have gone astray. (Jews and Christians.) In the first few verses the book discusses how non-believers will be hypocrites and deceivers whom Allah will mock. Within the first two verses we see Allah as angry and vengeful.

These are simply the words in the book.

You can tell me over and over again that I don't have the correct historical interpretation, or I don't understand the customs of the seventh century or... on and on. You could be correct about all of that.

But you are NOT considering the person who just picks up the book and starts to read. You must consider this person's experience.

And of course, it's not like once you get past the first few verses things get more peaceful. Messages of fear, punishment, humiliation, "us vs. them", anger and so on are a part of almost every Surah.

 

[Sabour]

Hi One-answer,

I'd like you to try to empathize with someone who comes to Quran with an open mind and sits down to read the book. You probably don't remember the time when the Quran was not a big part of your life, but try to imagine an adult (or teenager), reading this book for the first time...

On the one hand, right from the beginning, the book claims that Allah is merciful. But within the first few pages, readers become frightened. Within the first few pages there is much discussion of Hellfire and the fate of nonbelievers. From the very first verse it is clear that the *merciful Allah* will always be angry with those people who have gone astray. (Jews and Christians.) In the first few verses the book discusses how non-believers will be hypocrites and deceivers whom Allah will mock. Within the first two verses we see Allah as angry and vengeful.

These are simply the words in the book.

You can tell me over and over again that I don't have the correct historical interpretation, or I don't understand the customs of the seventh century or... on and on. You could be correct about all of that.

But you are NOT considering the person who just picks up the book and starts to read. You must consider this person's experience.

And of course, it's not like once you get past the first few verses things get more peaceful. Messages of fear, punishment, humiliation, "us vs. them", anger and so on are a part of almost every Surah.

I have read this over and over and over and over and over and one more time over again in your thread. Your point was made. I made a point too when I addressed it, but of course you don't remember.

 

[icehorse]

Hi One-answer,

No matter what else happens, I think it's great that you take time to discuss this - you have my sincere thanks!

My memory is that you have answered questions that are slightly different than the one I'm asking. This is not a criticism, we're talking about tricky stuff.

For example, in this thread I'm interested in how a person coming to the Quran with no agenda would read the book. In *this* thread I'm not interested in academic interpretations or historical context or anything like that. I'm interested in someone reading the book for the first time, using a modern, 2014 mindset.

I'm also not arguing that there are no peaceful verses. Of course there are. My argument instead is that - in this world - people and things are often judged by their worst moments. Again, we would never consider saying "Bob is a great guy, except once a year he murders someone". It doesn't matter that Bob is a great guy 364 days of the year - he'll be judged by the day when he murders someone.

Again, try to empathize with an outsider. It is well known by non-believers that Muslims consider the Quran to be the perfect, eternal, unalterable word of God. When the book criticizes non-believers over and over and over again, 500 times, that message will seem important.

Can you try looking at the book through the eyes of someone reading it for the first time?

 

[Sabour]

Hi One-answer,

No matter what else happens, I think it's great that you take time to discuss this - you have my sincere thanks!

My memory is that you have answered questions that are slightly different than the one I'm asking. This is not a criticism, we're talking about tricky stuff.

For example, in this thread I'm interested in how a person coming to the Quran with no agenda would read the book. In *this* thread I'm not interested in academic interpretations or historical context or anything like that. I'm interested in someone reading the book for the first time, using a modern, 2014 mindset.

I'm also not arguing that there are no peaceful verses. Of course there are. My argument instead is that - in this world - people and things are often judged by their worst moments. Again, we would never consider saying "Bob is a great guy, except once a year he murders someone". It doesn't matter that Bob is a great guy 364 days of the year - he'll be judged by the day when he murders someone.

Again, try to empathize with an outsider. It is well known by non-believers that Muslims consider the Quran to be the perfect, eternal, unalterable word of God. When the book criticizes non-believers over and over and over again, 500 times, that message will seem important.

Can you try looking at the book through the eyes of someone reading it for the first time?

Perhaps I am not being clear. This is not about me, this is about you. Do I look like someone who is born yesterday and doesn't know his faith?

Do you think I don't read between the lines?

Perhaps I haven't been clear in the first place. Reread what I wrote. Stop putting same claims over and over again.