Originally posted by: Rehanism
"The entire article itself is a work of interpretation by the author. In order to claim that Islam cannot be reformed, the author interprets the Quran and the fact that Mohammed is the last prophet in a way that supports his argument. " - Explain this..Explain how exactly should be the proper interpretation of Quran and Muhammad's prophet-hood!
Precisely my point. There is no proper interpretation. It is all subject to the reader and interpretor.
Originally posted by: Rehanism
And what was that? Interpret in a more humanist manner? You mean translate things like "Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them" into "Kiss the unbelievers wherever you find them"?
Could you cite which specific Surah you are referring to so I can see the full context. Most of the instances of such commandments I recollect in the Quran were similar to the narratives in the Old Testament.
The Quran does have several instances where it maligns infidels and calls for action against them. The specific action "kill" is translative. The more appropriate translation is usually "destroy". Now destroy in itself is not a constructive word, but still it is subject to the mind frame of the interpretor.
Firstly we have who do we consider as an "unbeliever" or "infidel". The extremists will say anyone who does not believe in Allah. Moderates might loosen it to be people who lack faith. While liberals interpret it to mean any person who is not essentially good. The most liberal interpretation is that even if a person is an atheist or of another faith, if they in essence are good people who try to do good, then they still follow Allah's commandments.
Also when you consider "destroy" you could take it literally or figuratively. You destroy the lack of faith or infidelity, not the person themselves. Some take it to mean conversion or sharing their faith. Most liberals take it very loosely to bridge gaps with people of other faith.
Abraham Lincoln said "Am I not destroying my enemies, when I make friends of them". The interpretation of a commandment is completely dependent on the integrity of the individual.
Precisely my point. There is no proper interpretation. It is all subject to the reader and interpretor.
Originally posted by: Rehanism
Let me tell you this, many do try to interpret Islam in a civilized manner to the best of their ability. For instance Islam gives man the right to beat his wife. Now this is unacceptable in modern world and no one in their right mind can consider this to be a civilized behavior. So what Islamic apologists do is that they tell you "Oh! this is not an actual beating, its rather a gentle padding with a handkerchief or a feather as a symbolic chastisement"..No matter how stupid this interpretation is, several Muslims are convinced by this. But when you read the Hadiths you find Aisha's account of being actually thrashed by Muhammad for leaving home without permission or Abu Bakr beating his wives and later on having a laugh about it with Muhammad and you find Muhammad saying "Man will be never asked why he beat his wife"..
That definitely is one hurdle to religious reform where people rather "explain" away problems than "solve" them.
But at least the human consciousness is working, people realize that times and frame of references have changed. The old testament still has violent commandments. Jewish people still have to reconcile their Torah with our modern sensibilities.
Originally posted by: Rehanism
Religious moderation, especially in case of Islam, is like covering up one lie with another..Muhammad was not a flawed human, he was a psychopath - a megalomaniac narcissist..He believed himself to be the raison de'tre of the existence of this universe and that's what Muslims believe him to be. He murdered hundreds in a single day in Banu Quraiza just like that, he raped and allowed his men to rape women captured in war, he looted caravans, raided villages, kidnapped women and sold them in market, he tortured people to extract the location of their treasures, he sent assassins to brutally murder those who had offended him - which included men women and old people. Murder, rape, genocide, sex trade, slave trade, highway robbery, assassination, pillage, pedophilia, torture, crimes against humanity - there's hardly a crime known to mankind this monster didn't commit..Even Adolf Hitler is dwarfed before him..And Muslims believe him to be the most perfect of all creations, seal of prophets and a mercy upon worlds and try to emulate him..You believe that some miracle would happen and all these facts would somehow change? And why should we pretend that Muhammad was just another human being who erred? Why then we don't attempt to find some "moderate" Nazism or "liberal" Fascism? Why, then, shouldn't we try to justify Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pot? Because they were not religious leaders?
A lot of the atrocities attributed to Mohammad are often embellished and exaggerated by people against Islam.
Also you have to consider frame of time and circumstances in history. Mohammad comes during a period of history where cruelty was a norm of society. He actually tried to bring order amidst warring tribes that were even more barbaric. You needed to wield some sort of brute force to tame many violent and waring factions that dominated the Middle East then.
Originally posted by: Rehanism
You ask if Christianity can be reformed why not Islam? Because despite the political power that the Church wielded in medieval Europe, Christianity itself never had a political character.
You are kidding me right?
Originally posted by: Rehanism
Christ was never interested in politics or worldly powers..When a citizen asked him whether they should pay their taxes to Caesar or to God, Jesus held up a coin and asked them "Whose face do you see?". They replied, "Caesar's". Jesus said "Then render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God that is God's"..This very statement laid the foundation of the principle of secularism that forced the Church to relinquish its hold upon politics, military and society of Europe..Christianity, on itself, is plainly a faith. Its not a political system. Islam is. Islam is not a mere devotional creed. Its politics, its military, its society, is culture, its state and its constitution and above all it is decreed by the creator of the universe to be the last, perfect and unchangeable religion..Secularism is not merely alien to Islam, its also antithetical to Islam. God is the head of the state and the sovereign dictator of all its affairs. There is no way of separating state, society, culture and religion in Islam. In short if you are to qualify as a good Muslim, you must lead a scripted life with little choice over your life style and behavior. And this is what makes Islam different from other religions..Islam is not just another religion. Its a cult of controlling the individual and the world.
If your understanding of Christianity is derived from a parable of Christ, your understanding of the history of the church is seriously lacking. There was a time Christianity was not just a faith, but a political system. Forget political system it was the state. There are still Christian sects that believe in creating God's Kingdom and having Christian governments.
Coming from the same roots all the western monotheisms share similar conceptual challenges. Islam is not that radically different, it just is the most young and least evolved of them.
Originally posted by: Rehanism
For once and for all, lets cut the crap about this "moderate" or "liberal" Islam..There's no such thing. There's only one Islam and that's Muhammad's Islam that is meant for all times. Even the simplest deviation from Islamic tenets have led to massacres and pogroms. Moderation is against Islam. No one has the right to reform or reinterpret Islam. Islam, as Muhammad designed and sealed it, is the perfect word of God for 1.6 billion Muslims..The ones who appear to be moderate Muslims or Secular Muslims are actually Munafiqs (hypocrites) in Islamic vocabulary. Its only ill-informed intellectuals like yourself who use these witless words like "moderate Islam" or "liberal Islam" or "extremist Islam".
This reminded me of the first Evangelical I met in the United States. He came up to me and asked me if I knew Jesus Christ. I answered "Yes, I went to Catholic School, so I learned a lot about Christ". The Evangelical replied "Well, Catholics are not real Christians".
Originally posted by: Rehanism
.The problem with you guys is that you don't know what it is actually like to believe in God, in salvation, in damnation, to believe that someone - some invisible big daddy - is constantly keeping an eye on you, your every movement is being watched and you'll be judged for every damn thing that you do..Have you read George Orwell's novel 1984? Islam is exactly like the nation state of Oceania and its Party and Allah is the Big Brother.
Interesting! Until you mentioned Allah I would have seriously mistaken you for describing the Bush Era.
Originally posted by: Rehanism
You called FFI biased - alright, then prove it wrong!! Whichever part you find is presumptuous or incorrect - present your own evidence against that! Before that watch this :
Ok. You win. The website is exactly like Fox News. Fair and Balanced!