[Merged] General Criticism of Islam/Islamophobia Topics

[A'isha]

"It's not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and his messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allah and his messenger, he is indeed strayed into a plain error." (33-36) (Quran, Hilali-Khan's translation)

And there has been a thousand-and-a-half years of Muslim scholars arguing with each other about just what "Allah and his messenger have decreed" ever since. And I personally am curious as to how you reconcile your own insistence that Muslims don't have "any option in their decision" when it comes to what "Allah and his messenger have decreed" with just the existence of madh'hab, to say nothing of scholars having a long tradition of issuing their own fatawa on matters that differ, often dramatically, from what other scholars have said about those same matters.

"But no, by your lord, they can have no faith, until they make you (O Muhammad) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission." (4-65)

Since Muhammad died 22 years after Islam began, that requirement is kind of moot, isn't it?

"Then do you believe in a part of the scripture and reject the rest? Then what is the recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in the life of his world, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be consigned to the most grievous torment." (2-85)

I hope you remember this verse every time you see someone argue that the "violent" Medinan surat of the Qur'an abrogate the "peaceful" Meccan surat.

 

[Belgian thought]

Yes, we understand that you are again Islamism and fundamentalism in Islam, dear. How does the existence to Islamism and fundamentalism in Islam demonstrate that Islam in toto is, by its very nature, incompatible with Western society, especially given the fact that Dominionists and fundamentalist Christians in the US are systematically working to dismantle the checks and balances that allow secularism to remain in place there?

Indeed the 'Dominionists and fundamentalist Christians in the US are systematically working to dismantle the checks and balances that allow secularism to remain in place there'

They are wrong, though I don't hate them .

But, name me an Islamic country that is trying its utmost to do the opposite, i.e. name me moderates and fundamentalists in the Islamic world that are systematically working to dismantle the checks and balances that forbid secularism to be in place there... And how big is their influence, and equate it with how big are the U.S. Christian fundamentalists making an inroad on the dismantling of U.S. secular values and system?

 

[Belgian thought]

Q 3:97 - "In it are clear signs, the standing place of Ibrahim, and whoever enters it shall be secure, and pilgrimage to the House [ie, the Ka'aba] is incumbent upon men for the sake of Allah, (upon) every one who is able to undertake the journey to it; and whoever disbelieves, then surely Allah is Self-sufficient, above any need of the worlds." (Shakir translation - Pickthal and Mohsin Khan translate "able to undertake" as "able to afford", the Arabic is is'taṭāʿa, to be capable of doing something).

Cheers - so mijopaalmc is correct when he mentions SA being a barrier i.e. 'if it is too "arduous" too do so–which, I would imagine, would include being prevented from entering Sa'udi Arabia by the hajj quota'.

That is wonderful irony.

 

[hgus]

To be fair to the Saudis there has to be a quota. There is a maximum number that could practically and safely do the ceremonies at the same time.

But I am sure that when the oil incomes starts to diminish, the Saudis will come to the conclusion, after lengthy and serious theological discussions, that it is actually possible to do the hajj any time of the year. Come one, come all. As long as you pay!

 

[Belgian thought]

To be fair to the Saudis there has to be a quota. There is a maximum number that could practically and safely do the ceremonies at the same time.

But I am sure that when the oil incomes starts to diminish, the Saudis will come to the conclusion, after lengthy and serious theological discussions, that it is actually possible to do the hajj any time of the year. Come one, come all. As long as you pay!

Cynic - be careful http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=278489

 

[hgus]

Cynic - be careful http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=278489

 

[A'isha]

one can make the even stronger point that islam cannot actually be reformed along these lines.

Woah, I missed this when I replied before. From that link:

Since, thanks to Islamic terrorism the interest to know Islam has peaked and Islam has come under scrutiny, the westerners began asking, where are the moderate Muslims. Well, there is none. The concept is absurd. Muslims view this issue differently. You are either a ‘good’ practicing Muslim or a bad wishy-washy Muslim. It’s the latter group that the westerners have misnamed moderate Muslims. As far as Muslims are concerned they are ‘hypocrites.’ Not surprisingly, the ‘moderates’ also confess being hypocrites. They will tell you they believe in Islam but they are not good Muslims. In the back of their minds however, they plan to become ‘good’ Muslims once they have done all the ‘sins’ and enjoyed life enough.

[...]

The problem with Islam is that it is rotten from its core. The evil is in its holy book. Many Muslims realize that there is something wrong with their religion. Unable to understand that the problem is the religion itself and unwilling to accept the truth, they pretend to reform Islam. The truth is that every Muslim knows that Islam cannot be reformed, but the idea has its appeal for the non-Muslims.

[...]

The so called reformers of Islam are misguided at best and deceptive at worst. Their efforts should not be welcomed. Whatever their intention, whether genuine or disingenuous, they are pulling wool over the eyes of non-Muslims and as the result giving legitimacy to a very dangerous creed.

[...]

The good Muslims are those who follow the Quran and the examples set by Muhammad and become terrorists.

*********** seriously?!

 

[hgus]

That is almost a text-book example of islamophobia.

 

[mijopaalmc]

Indeed the 'Dominionists and fundamentalist Christians in the US are systematically working to dismantle the checks and balances that allow secularism to remain in place there'

They are wrong, though I don't hate them .

But, name me an Islamic country that is trying its utmost to do the opposite, i.e. name me moderates and fundamentalists in the Islamic world that are systematically working to dismantle the checks and balances that forbid secularism to be in place there... And how big is their influence, and equate it with how big are the U.S. Christian fundamentalists making an inroad on the dismantling of U.S. secular values and system?

Why do you try so hard to miss the point?


The fact that there are politically powerful extremists in Islam in no way means that Islam in toto is fundamentally incompatible with Western society any more than the fact that there are politically powerful extremists in Christianity mean that Christianity in toto is fundamentally incompatible with Western society.

What is so hard to understand about that?

 

[Belgian thought]

Why do you try so hard to miss the point?


The fact that there are politically powerful extremists in Islam in no way means that Islam in toto is fundamentally incompatible with Western society any more than the fact that there are politically powerful extremists in Christianity mean that Christianity in toto is fundamentally incompatible with Western society.

What is so hard to understand about that?

You made the point in the first place, by trying to equate two different things.

It isn't about Islam in toto equating with Christianity in toto.

Both are nonsense.

However, Christianity in toto (why you had to put 'in toto' in italics I will never know, but at this time of the night, formatting is not my strong point) has been removed through the creation of secular states and countries.

With Islam in toto it is has not.

What is so hard to understand about that?

 

[mijopaalmc]

Cheers - so mijopaalmc is correct when he mentions SA being a barrier i.e. 'if it is too "arduous" too do so–which, I would imagine, would include being prevented from entering Sa'udi Arabia by the hajj quota'.

That is wonderful irony.

Seems that you see only what you want to see. Your original comment about the hajj was essentially: "Why can't Muslims take their pilgrimage to Mecca to somewhere else than to Mecca so they are not supporting the extremist Wahabiyyah?". When I pointed out to you that the hajj is, by definition, "the pilgrimage to Mecca", you hemmed and hawed about how the definition of the hajj made it impossible for Islam to reform while ignoring the fact that petroleum and petroleum products are far more import that the kingdom's economy that religious tourism is. Now, you're delighting in the fact that Sa'udi policies are hindering a central, religious obligations of Islam while ignoring that the Quran itself made allowance for the ability to complete the hajj.

You seem quite intent on finding fault with Islam while ignoring the fact that Islam, apparently since its very beginning, has addressed some of the issues you raise. Could this be because you are an Islamophobe?

 

[A'isha]

Seems that you see only what you want to see. Your original comment about the hajj was essentially: "Why can't Muslims take their pilgrimage to Mecca to somewhere else than to Mecca so they are not supporting the extremist Wahabiyyah?". When I pointed out to you that the hajj is, by definition, "the pilgrimage to Mecca", you hemmed and hawed about how the definition of the hajj made it impossible for Islam to reform while ignoring the fact that petroleum and petroleum products are far more import that the kingdom's economy that religious tourism is. Now, you're delighting in the fact that Sa'udi policies are hindering a central, religious obligations of Islam while ignoring that the Quran itself made allowance for the ability to complete the hajj.

You seem quite intent on finding fault with Islam while ignoring the fact that Islam, apparently since its very beginning, has addressed some of the issues you raise. Could this be because you are an Islamophobe?

I've had my own disagreements with Belgian thought on Islam, but I think you're being excessively and needlessly hostile towards him.

 

[mijopaalmc]

I've had my own disagreements with Belgian thought on Islam, but I think you're being excessively and needlessly hostile towards him.

I agree that I have in fact directed my hostility to towards him as a person–and not his ideas–and I apologize for personalizing my interactions with him.

 

[Frozenwolf150]

How does the religion reconcile the fact that the vast majority are not able to fulfil one of the fifth pillars of their faith?

The fourth pillar, sawm, or fasting during Ramadan, is also optional if there are extenuating circumstances. The very young, very old, those in poor health, and those on certain medications, do not have to go through with the fasting, because it could very well do them harm. Indeed, the Muslim friend I mentioned earlier in this thread treated Ramadan as a time of fun and festivities, where the fasting was something you wanted to do because it meant you got to party before sunrise and after sunset.

For more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawm#Conditions_of_fasting

 

[Frozenwolf150]

The crucial point is that there is still no moderate islam in the western acceptation of the word (no Islamic counterpart of moderate Christianity and Reform Judaism) and one can make the even stronger point that islam cannot actually be reformed along these lines.

Talk about assuming your conclusion.

By the way, in case you missed it earlier:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10045033#post10045033

 

[Chaos]

Woah, I missed this when I replied before. From that link:



*********** seriously?!

The lies start right in the first sentence you quote - one thing these folks DO NOT have is an "interest to know Islam".

 

[tsig]

Q 3:97 - "In it are clear signs, the standing place of Ibrahim, and whoever enters it shall be secure, and pilgrimage to the House [ie, the Ka'aba] is incumbent upon men for the sake of Allah, (upon) every one who is able to undertake the journey to it; and whoever disbelieves, then surely Allah is Self-sufficient, above any need of the worlds." (Shakir translation - Pickthal and Mohsin Khan translate "able to undertake" as "able to afford", the Arabic is is'taṭāʿa, to be capable of doing something).

Sounds like the time is ripe for a revelation from Allah that "the House" really means "a House" so there can be other pilgrimage sites.

Wouldn't want to be the revelator though.

 

[Humes fork]

Interesting tweet:

This is brother Rizwan introducing an infidel to the Peace in Islam pic.twitter.com/kP5GsPl4ZX

 

[A'isha]

Interesting tweet:

What, exactly, do you find so "interesting" about that tweet? And what are your thoughts on that twitter feed in general, Humes fork?

Oh, and since I'm at it, what's your opinion on metacristi's link quoted above. I'm curious if you think that's also just "criticism of Islam", or something else.

 

[Peter May]

Sounds like the time is ripe for a revelation from Allah that "the House" really means "a House" so there can be other pilgrimage sites.

Wouldn't want to be the revelator though.

If Shakespeare had read the Koran he might have wrote, “Much Ado About Nothing”.

Somewhere in the Bible there is a passage, “In my fathers house there are many mansions”,
which can mean almost anything you want it to. Keep em guessing, that's the ticket!