Because you claimed to be able to judge what is in the Quran just seconds ago.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why do people hate Muslims?
- Thread starter Nakosis
- Start date
The very basic doctrine of Islam that you were able to isolate as a non Muslim without reading understanding or explaining Quran 28:48-50 and 3:199 etc?
Yes, the very same.
I took years building a careful consideration of Islaam, mainly from the claims and attitudes of Muslims and, sure, from some of its critics as well.
I think that would be like spending years studying the attitudes of Jews and claiming to be an expert on Judaism without reading the Bible or the source texts.
That is like saying;
I have studied the attitudes of mathematicians for years and have become an expert in mathematics even though I have actually never studied mathematics. If you want me to change my views on mathematics you will have to do better than tell me to study math.
It seems to me that there are two problematic groups:
- extremists, I suspect we all agree
- Islamists (those who want Sharia to be the law). This is a MUCH larger group, perhaps 500 million strong. This is the group that I think the West should really be focused on. This is the group that's the biggest risk to secularism and universal human rights.
Perhaps. I many senses it would be better and more reliable. Facts are facts, and scripture can only carry a doctrine so far.
In any case, I have read some of the Qur'an. Enough to feel confident that I am not missing too much.
That is a very crude parallel, though.
The failure to consider that a doctrine stands or falls by the interpretations, while mathematics is about as objective a discipline and impersonal as they come is by itself enough to empty this comparison of any meaning.
You do a great job of creating an aura of authentification! I like it better than atheification
Thanks. I have learned that people must be approached at the levels and with the languages that they are used to, if understanding is to be attained.
LOL. So I guess we can basically ignore you as you will not have anything new or interesting to say. Thanks for the heads up
I think I'm hearing you say that the Quran is inconsistent, so we have to look at how the reader interprets it? If so, would you agree that we can look at the historical evidence (and modern evidence), and make statistical assessments of how Muslims interpret it? E.g. if 90% of Muslims agree that the Quran says "X", can we conclude that "X" can be scrutinized, and that it would be fair and useful to do so?
Notanumber
A Free Man
I have been talking with a man this morning that worked in Riyadh from 1972 to 1984 so I asked him if he ever saw any religious police on the streets. He said that there were plenty at that time and his wife had to make sure she was fully covered if she went anywhere.
He said that there were a young couple with a baby in a pushchair. The baby threw its rattle on the ground and when the woman bent down to pick it up, she exposed an ankle by mistake. The police hit her with sticks.
He said that public stonings of ‘adulterous’ women took place on a Friday, but not as you would expect. Apparently, a tipper truck would discharge its load directly onto the women. He was there and witnessed what was going on so I have no reason to doubt him, but it seemed to be removing their enjoyment of the proceedings, I would have thought.
This partly backs up what he told me - Witness to a stoning
He said that there were a young couple with a baby in a pushchair. The baby threw its rattle on the ground and when the woman bent down to pick it up, she exposed an ankle by mistake. The police hit her with sticks.
He said that public stonings of ‘adulterous’ women took place on a Friday, but not as you would expect. Apparently, a tipper truck would discharge its load directly onto the women. He was there and witnessed what was going on so I have no reason to doubt him, but it seemed to be removing their enjoyment of the proceedings, I would have thought.
This partly backs up what he told me - Witness to a stoning
Are you trying to be ironical? If you are, you succeeded quite fiercely.
Can you please elaborate?
hmmm...
Let's imagine that we did a large poll of 10s of thousands of Muslims from around the world and the result was that 90% of them agreed that the Quran is the "perfect, timeless, final, unalterable word of Allah".
Could we generalize the result of that poll question? Would it be fair to say - for example - that "Muslims believe the Quran can not be revised." ?
I would certainly hope so, because much of what drives society is based on statistical truths.
I'm just saying that if all you do is read what others believe without knowing what is in the source texts then it's unlikely you will have meaningful insight into the direction things are moving or can move.
Polls have a nasty habit of changing. For example, one month a President can have an 80% job approval and the next it drops to 30%. So we need more than just statistics we also need to understand the subject we are studying.
In my opinion there is already enough modern archaeological evidence to question the Orthodox narrative/ understanding of the Quran / Islam and make rational, reasonable and peaceful people out of its followers.
Given the current level of evidence I don't think it is possible to change the Quran. However, I also don't think it is necessary to change the Quran
Last edited:
Given the problem in translation and the profound differences in some versions, you don't have access to the text of the Quran in Arabic unless you can read that language.
The best example I know of the problem of translation is 17:104. This example makes me very skeptical about those who rely on just one translation or even a couple to give opinions about what the Quran actually says. Because, depending on the translation, a non-Muslim could easily argue that this Sura proves we're living in the end times and that the state of Israel exists because of the will of God. Care to guess how many Muslims agree with this interpretation?
Palazzi (actually 17:100-104 giving some context) "Pharoah sought to scare them [the Israelites] out of the land [of Israel]: but We [Allah] drowned him [Pharoah] together with all who were with him. Then We [Allah] said to the Israelites: 'Dwell in this land [the Land of Israel]. When the promise of the hereafter [End of Days] comes to be fulfilled, We [Allah] shall assemble you [the Israelites] all together [in the Land of Israel]."
Khalifa And we said to the Children of Israel afterwards, "Go live in this land. When the final prophecy comes to pass, we will summon you all in one group."
Yusuf Ali And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, "Dwell securely in the land (of promise)": but when the second of the warnings came to pass, We gathered you together in a mingled crowd.
Pickthal And We said unto the Children of Israel after him: Dwell in the land; but when the promise of the Hereafter cometh to pass We shall bring you as a crowd gathered out of various nations.
Shakir And We said to the Israelites after him: Dwell in the land: and when the promise of the next life shall come to pass, we will bring you both together in judgment.
Sher Ali And after him WE said to the Children of Israel, Dwell ye in the promised land; and when the time of the promise of the Latter Days comes, WE shall bring you together out of various peoples.'
"Progressive Muslims" And We said after him to the Children of Israel: "Dwell in the land, then, when the time of the second promise comes, We will bring you all together as a mixed crowd."
Al-Qurtub: And We said to the Children of Israel after him: "Dwell in the land, then, when the final and the last promise comes near [i.e. the Day of Resurrection or the descent of Christ ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) on the earth]. We shall bring you altogether as mixed crowd (gathered out of various nations).
Al-Shia.com We told the Israelites after this to settle in the land until Our second promise will come true. We would then gather them all together (on the Day of Judgment).
How many Christians know and understand the implications of the Sermon on the Mount and try to live according to what it says?
I suspect most Muslims are as ignorant about the Quran as most Christians are of the deep meaning of the New Testament.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
That is certainly my impression too. At least Christians can rely on Christian dogma stemming from various church authorities however. Given that there is no longer a single authority (a caliphate), it is up to individual Muslims to interpret things however they wish, however they understand, or go with whatever their favorite Imam tells them.
In this way, @LuisDantas has every right to interpret the Qur'an however he wishes, but more to the point, it's very difficult to say any interpretation is wrong as there is no central authority to say otherwise.
I see it that way as well which is why I don't agree with those who state "Islam says" when there is no one voice of Islam and what they cite is an imperfect translation or the opinion of a particular group of Muslims.
I think this wikipedia article gives a good overview of the various opinions about Hudud crimes, for example Hudud - Wikipedia