G
GaryTaylor
Guest
See above.
Quran dissected by American PHD. Educated enough?Btw how’s Islam doing with women? Still collecting them like domesticated animals? Oh wait “God said so”
And if you speak out they put a HIT on you.
- Status
Quran dissected by American PHD. Educated enough?Btw how’s Islam doing with women? Still collecting them like domesticated animals? Oh wait “God said so”
And if you speak out they put a HIT on you.
A
aspirant
Guest
With all due respect to Dr. Sultan, with whom I agree about some things, a former adherent who-- only a few minutes into the conversation-- cites unreliable source material is, unfortunately, not the most credible witness to what Muslims really believe.
The story of Asma bint Marwan comes from Ibn Ishaq’s biography of Muhammad, which I mentioned earlier in the thread. This biography is not hadith and not considered trustworthy by many Muslims, especially in matters of morality, conduct, and jurisprudence, in large part because Ishaq frequently uses phrases such as “it is alleged” and rarely cites his own sources. The story of Asma bint Marwan, in particular, is considered by many hadith scholars to be a fabrication, probably by Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj. So even if you believe the story of Asma is true, most Muslims believe it is false, and they do not look to it for moral guidance in their own lives.
Later in the video, an unreliable hadith is related: “A woman’s paradise is under her husband’s foot.” It does sound horrible when phrased and presented that way, and I can understand why Dr. Sultan shudders. A more reliable hadith, however, puts the unreliable one in a different light: “a man came to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and said, ‘O Messenger of Allah! I intend to go on a (military) expedition, but I have come to ask your advice.’ He said, ‘Is your mother alive?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘Then remain with her, for paradise is under her feet.’” Such sayings are not about being tyrannized in the afterlife, but about gaining paradise through relationships. (The latter, more reliable hadith is the source of the Muslim feminist book title Paradise Beneath Her Feet.)
I’m sorry, but the credibility here is pretty low.
A
aspirant
Guest
You’re talking about plenty of things other than Robert Spencer here, so I see no reason not to respond.
Unlike you I’ve actually cited sources, most of them firsthand.
I am Catholic. I was under the impression that you are too, which is why Catholicism is relevant to us.
What personal attack?
Nope. When I want to know what Buddhists believe, I consult primarily Buddhist sources. When I want to know what Jews believe, I consult primarily Jewish sources. When I want to know what Muslims believe, I consult primarily Muslim sources. When I want to know what Baptists believe, I consult primarily Baptist sources.
Are you suggesting that there is a correct interpretation that Muslims don’t know?
It is not a “rant” to ask you for clarification. I would actually like to know what you mean. It is hard to discern at times.
What secular Muslims? The only one I’ve encountered on the thread so far is Dr. Sultan, who calls herself a Muslim who does not believe in Islam.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Islamic Terrorism, included… Robert Spencer. I guess Wikipedia deemed Robert Spencer “qualified” enough to source?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism
War is treachery, never mind terrorism.
Do muslims decide what non-muslims believe? That’s a “resounding” YES! At least they think so and dictate this agenda in their states ruled by Sharia Law. Above link further confirms.
Course we could go with the secular muslims in America, but they simply may be “Americanized” and do not understand the “true” meaning which of course arab speaking muslims in arab states of Sharia Law do. Sounds dangerous for them[secular muslims] imho. Just as it was for all those “good” muslims who fleed Iran an who thought those hate verse’s were tongue and cheek. I guess they were shocked to learn otherwise.
That alone is what is presented here. the secular muslim view. No reason that will succeed in Islam. If fact reality unfolding suggests otherwise.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism
War is treachery, never mind terrorism.
Do muslims decide what non-muslims believe? That’s a “resounding” YES! At least they think so and dictate this agenda in their states ruled by Sharia Law. Above link further confirms.
Course we could go with the secular muslims in America, but they simply may be “Americanized” and do not understand the “true” meaning which of course arab speaking muslims in arab states of Sharia Law do. Sounds dangerous for them[secular muslims] imho. Just as it was for all those “good” muslims who fleed Iran an who thought those hate verse’s were tongue and cheek. I guess they were shocked to learn otherwise.
That alone is what is presented here. the secular muslim view. No reason that will succeed in Islam. If fact reality unfolding suggests otherwise.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
No YOU are talking about “treachery in war” remember?You’re talking about plenty of things other than Robert Spencer here, so I see no reason not to respond.
Those must be invisible links I posted.
Good we are in agreement we are both Catholic?
The one directly quoted above.
You haven’t quoted anything but secular muslims which does not respresnt all of Islam, nor have you responded to anything but your continued representation of secular Islam.
I don’t know what all muslims know do you?
Hard to discern you also, would you clarify you thinking on Radical Islam and Sharia Law/
First you admit they exist then ask me where? On your links!
Secular Americanized muslims in a country where they are the “minority” are a weak argument for you and Islam, that is my point. Pretty much a consistent in history and Islamic converstion of countries by Sharia Law.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Of course “most” muslims would deny as you do the above. I find her evaluation spot on. And yours, well favorable of Islam and bias. Course this was covered in the Satanic Verse’s? Then a hit was placed on the man by Islam.
You mean paradise beneath their keepers feet along with the domesticated animals.
Your Sharia Law states SCREAM that the good doctor is indeed correct. Course she’s not muslim so she has no relevant say according to you. Very telling. Oh and she is woman to boot.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Btw aspirant is this the point where you again claim confused as to the topic we are on?
Treachery in Islam in case your confused. Which “YOU” bought up and I intend to ride like a broken mule.
Treachery in Islam in case your confused.
Which “YOU” bought up and I intend to ride like a broken mule.
R
robwar
Guest
exactly! and the peaceful ones are those that live in America where they are required by our diverse culture to present the “peaceful” Islam. They are also well educated and doing quite well financially. In Detroit, right after 9/11, leading Imman publicly condemned what happen but then a couple years later, he was convicted of secretly funding terrorists through his non-profit charities. This thread is about Robert Spencer, not whether any of us know Muslims and how nice or sincere we think they are.
A
aspirant
Guest
OK. How are you defining treachery in this expression?
Nope. They’re not the source of our doctrine, for example.
This is absurd. Plenty of American Muslims are observant, educated, and fluent in Arabic, among other languages.
So far, the only secular Muslim cited has been Dr. Sultan, and you were the one who linked to her video.
Because manualman brought it up and you extended the conversation.
Wafa Sultan cites sources that Muslims do not consider authentically Islamic. Can you provide some more credible sources?
I’ve been assuming we both are.
What personal attack?
I’ve been quoting ahadith and other observant Muslim sources. What secular Muslims other than Dr. Sultan have been quoted?
How is this a response to the question?
Would you clarify what you mean by “Radical Islam”? Regarding shariah, I have found this series of articles informative.
A
aspirant
Guest
Ibn Ishaq’s biography of Muhammad is a very early text about Muhammad, but a text without credibility to many Muslims because many elements come from unknown sources, are believed to be forged, and disagree in many places with the tradition that is considered authentic. A good analogy, in a Christian context, would be the Gospel of Thomas. It’s a very early text about Jesus, but a text without credibility to us because many elements come from unknown sources, are believed to be forged, and disagree with the tradition that is considered authentic.
There are people who believe Ibn Ishaq despite his lack of credibility among Muslims (Dr. Sultan, for example), just as there are people who believe the Gospel of Thomas despite its lack of credibility among Christians (Elaine Pagels, perhaps). But just as the Gospel of Thomas does not significantly shape what we believe about Jesus-- we look to the canonical scriptures and sacred tradition instead, the biography by Ibn Ishaq doesn’t significantly shape what most Muslims believe about Muhammad-- they look to the Qur’an, reliable ahadith, and subsequent scholars instead.
So you are welcome to believe the story if you want, as Dr. Sultan does. Just don’t assume that Muslims look to it for personal guidance. They have other sources for that.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
I have no idea what you are talking about aspirant. I’m confused by your disconnected conversation. Perhaps I’m misunderstanding you, could you please elaborate on Treachery of War as related to Islam and what exactly YOU mean by this? I’m a pacifist in case you didn’t catch that. I believe violence is a tool of the ignorant “period” in case you missed that. Is it OK to be Catholic after I said that in your opinion?
Are men equal to women in Islam in YOUR opinion? Do you believe they should be? Whats YOUR thoughts on Sharia Law?
Are men equal to women in Islam in YOUR opinion? Do you believe they should be? Whats YOUR thoughts on Sharia Law?
A
aspirant
Guest
Then I guess we are just talking past one another.
I’d be happy to answer if I understood what you were asking. I have already discussed what the term treachery means among the Muslims I have consulted. Could you rephrase your question?
My opinion on that doesn’t really matter.
Muslims appear to have a variety of beliefs on this topic.
I believe women and men are equally human persons, made in the image of God. If you really want to know more about what I believe, this book is a good starting point.
It’s a Muslim concept. I want to better understand what they mean by it.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Yes and apparently many muslims think otherwise, and many also left Islam.
answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/sverses.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Asma%27_bint_Marwan
answering-islam.org/Muhammad/Enemies/asma.html
Fake is the best response Islam comes up with. Though those hate verse’s in the Quran coincide marvelously.
I see no logical reason why anyone would carry on in a false quest that no doubt placed their life at risk. I would think “anyone” with a PHD in psychiatry would have more sense.
Maybe she hates what she found true hate in?
You know how the saying goes don’t hate nothing at all except hatred. “Bob Dylan”
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Happens now and then no biggie.
What do you consider treachery in war? As you see I consider war treachery and have “zero” use for violence. So perhaps I could learn the value of violence from you in your personal understanding here?
AmenMy opinion on that doesn’t really matter.
But not in Sharia Law areas. These areas are my concern because you see those areas are majority muslim. And when one controls the majority then the majority is subject to the true teachings of the elected leader and his understanding of Gods message. As I stated earlier in relation to Holy War.
You see I have little concern what muslims in Michigan have to say about Sharia Law in the middle east. Not to sound critical, just being honest. They are here in the US and the “minority”. Where are they speaking up clearly in those Sharia Law areas? They are “silenced” there. So either they are scared to talk which I do not believe, or they truly believe in Sharia Law which I do believe. Or you see they would leave. And when they propose any agenda other than Sharia Law they are considered “secular”.
Yes, nevertheless the dilemma we are talking about is the “overall” treatment of women in the middle east [Sharia Law]. How are they doing there? Treated like domesticated animals? Yes or No?
You speak so clearly on Islam and do not understand Sharia Law?
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Perhaps we should discuss Sharia Law?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
"Secularists- believe that the law of the state should be based on secular principles, not on Islamic legal doctrines.
Traditionalists- believe that the law of the state should be based on the traditional legal schools.
Reformers- believe that new Islamic legal theories can produce modernized Islamic law and lead to acceptable opinions in areas such as women’s rights. However, traditionalists believe that any departure from the legal teachings of the Quran as explained by the Prophet Muhammad and put into practice by him is an alien concept that cannot properly be attributed."
Is not the issue Sharia Law and where it is imposed? Then why would we not address this instead of a Secular Islamic view which doesn’t exist anywhere in a model of secular Islam where Islam is the “majority”.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
"Secularists- believe that the law of the state should be based on secular principles, not on Islamic legal doctrines.
Traditionalists- believe that the law of the state should be based on the traditional legal schools.
Reformers- believe that new Islamic legal theories can produce modernized Islamic law and lead to acceptable opinions in areas such as women’s rights. However, traditionalists believe that any departure from the legal teachings of the Quran as explained by the Prophet Muhammad and put into practice by him is an alien concept that cannot properly be attributed."
Is not the issue Sharia Law and where it is imposed? Then why would we not address this instead of a Secular Islamic view which doesn’t exist anywhere in a model of secular Islam where Islam is the “majority”.
R
robwar
Guest
So the earliest book about Mohammed are not reliable according to you? Yet Mr. Spencer shows in his books about Mohammed that all biographies about Mohammed which surface nearly 200 years after his death are based on him. One reads the Koran based on hadiths which conflict with each other just as the Koran is conflicted within it’s self. Mr. Spencer just lifts off the veil and shows the real Islam using their own sources and teachings. It’s sad that too many Catholics seem to know more and defend Islam than their own faith and what we believe about God (trinity), Jesus (Islam believes he is a prophet but not God’s son because Allah wouldn’t have a son), our Bible NT and OT are corrupted, Jesus didn’t die on the cross, another man did. Likewise, Islam paints God as some distance unknowable, brutal force which is just to be submitted to, thus the name Islam (submission). Allah is not a loving father but a distant master that is unknowable., I think I’ll stick with God Our Father, not some cruel master with a false prophet like Mohammed.
Besides that, I think I am the only woman on this thread and the real Islam is a macho man’s faith where men can beat women, marry young girls, rape non-Muslim women, have sex slaves and 4 wives. It seems like only men want to defend this not any free thinking women. But then, Islam doesn’t allow women to be educated just married at 9 to be raped. This thread is about someone that is brave enough to expose all of this not sweep it under the carpet in the name of dialog because there are nice Muslims out there. There are nice Muslims but this is about a Catholic man that is brave enough to expose and follow truth not lies.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
- Mr. Spencer’s books on Mohammad- I seem to remember a thread on one of these books in which your only response to my comments concerning
-his lack of qualifications
-his refusal to submit his work for peer review
-his selective use of sources
-the parallel argument that can be made on the same shoddy standards concerning the existence of Christ as a real person
-the fact that a book was written within the life time of people who actual knew Napoleon which “proved” Napoleon never existed
-and my claim that I could prove you are really Robert Spencer
- I fail to see how Mr. Spencer being Catholic has any bearing on the issue concerning the validity of him as an expert or the validity of his work.
R
robwar
Guest
Hi old catholic and yes you and I did go around and around on this before. I think we will just have to agree to disagree. The people who claim shoddy or unqualified research basically have not proven why he is wrong at all. Since Islam is such a hot button issue and the fact that academia is under a lot of pressure to be “tolerant” and accommodating,
I am not sure any “higher” education is going to do “research” on Islam that exposes it or is critical, especially since major universities are bending over backwards to accommodate the demands of Muslims for special prayer rooms and foot washing places.
Our previous discussion concerned Robert Spencer’s book “Did Mohammed really exist?”
Something that has been asked about Jesus numerous times but not about Mohammed.
I actually still don’t know what to think concerning Mohammed’s existence but when you read about his life, he is such an immoral man sexually that why would someone make it up, it is disgusting. If he is the final and greatest prophet of God, I think one would make up a better moral character than what is recorded and written about him by Muslims themselves. The Koran says he is an excellent example to follow and sadly too many follow his example on how to live and treat women.
P
pietro1
Guest
GaryTaylor
Question about Spencer; what is he doing and so on, is completely different topic from Islam as such.
If modestly informed spectator heard only one minute of debate between Spencer and professors from Franciscan University on You tube, he could come to only one conclusion: Robert Spencer works for poltical aim ( not necessarily consciously) and so do his co-speakers - fundamentalist christians which think they are still in Middle Ages.
They were talking about arab spring like some kind of jihad , - which can’t be more far from the truth. They try to portray Arab spring as fudementalist islamic revolution, as something negative. Arab spring is secular popular uprising against tyrant - which USA supported - so it was also uprising against US foreign policy. Isrealand US dosen’t like these uprisings throughout arab countries, because they could change permissive policy of arab countries toward Israeli destruction of Palestinan people and could gain more freedom from oppressor - US - and aggressor - in Iraq and Afganistan.
So this debate is actualy a political fight and not - like somebody here metioned - spiritual battle or it is both, but the question is then, who is on whose side?
Open a thread “Sharia Law”.
Question about Spencer; what is he doing and so on, is completely different topic from Islam as such.
If modestly informed spectator heard only one minute of debate between Spencer and professors from Franciscan University on You tube, he could come to only one conclusion: Robert Spencer works for poltical aim ( not necessarily consciously) and so do his co-speakers - fundamentalist christians which think they are still in Middle Ages.
They were talking about arab spring like some kind of jihad , - which can’t be more far from the truth. They try to portray Arab spring as fudementalist islamic revolution, as something negative. Arab spring is secular popular uprising against tyrant - which USA supported - so it was also uprising against US foreign policy. Isrealand US dosen’t like these uprisings throughout arab countries, because they could change permissive policy of arab countries toward Israeli destruction of Palestinan people and could gain more freedom from oppressor - US - and aggressor - in Iraq and Afganistan.
So this debate is actualy a political fight and not - like somebody here metioned - spiritual battle or it is both, but the question is then, who is on whose side?
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
- Status