Join us now. It is free, and it takes less than 1 minute to register.
Register now
Subscribe to our daily newsletter. It is free, and it comes with many benefits.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 66 FirstFirst ... 7891011121314152161 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 988

Thread: Introduction to Islam

  1. #151
    Super Grandmaster falcon786's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Where I can see what I breathe.
    Posts
    8,900

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by R/SGT View Post
    I have no problem with wayfarers thread as long as he sticks to explaining Islam, however when he starts pontificating about Christianity and the Holy trinity then it is a attack on my faith.



    As for the above, most Christian debates are subject to the same thing , so deal with it.

    What makes this thread so special that it deserves special treatment

    If you can’t deal with it, well no one is forcing you to stay and try and educate us Kafirs
    I'm forcing him to stay and educate those that asked to be enlightened about Islam(People have asked me to create this thread to understand Islam and its views.),this thread wasn't created for you and it seems you cant respect other peoples beliefs since you cant simply discuss these issues in the other thread,you are clearly intent on trolling instead.

    Lets be civilized about this nobody said you have to agree with everything we believe in and if it offends you then theres a thread wayfarer created for you to say so,you have a platform to speak in that thread.Why derail this one?

  2. #152

    Default

    No fighting allowed in this thread.
    DEL PythonFSi

  3. #153

    Default

    [UOTE=falcon786;8922893]I'm forcing him to stay and educate those that asked to be enlightened about Islam(People have asked me to create this thread to understand Islam and its views.),this thread wasn't created for you and it seems you cant respect other peoples beliefs since you cant simply discuss these issues in the other thread,you are clearly intent on trolling instead.

    Lets be civilized about this nobody said you have to agree with everything we believe in and if it offends you then theres a thread wayfarer created for you to say so,you have a platform to speak in that thread.Why derail this one?[/QUOTE]

    Okay well have fun then, I wasnít trolling and did actual ask some relevant questions earlier on in the thread.

    Careful you donít fall of your horse

  4. #154
    Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Africa.
    Posts
    1,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by R/SGT View Post
    I have no problem with wayfarers thread as long as he sticks to explaining Islam, however when he starts pontificating about Christianity and the Holy trinity then it is a attack on my faith.



    As for the above, most Christian debates are subject to the same thing , so deal with it.

    What makes this thread so special that it deserves special treatment

    If you can’t deal with it, well no one is forcing you to stay and try and educate us Kafirs
    Just to correct you there... Your not a Kafir.
    Kafir's are disbelievers. You have different levels of Kufur (Disbelief).

    Plainly speaking if you completely deny Gods existence then yes you are Kafir.
    Judging by your Faith being Christianity you are also a person of the book (Ahlul Kitab). I.E. You believe in God.

    Just because your book is not the Quraan but the Injeel (Bible) still makes you a believer.

    So no you not a Kafir. Technically a person does not have to subscribe to any of the 3 Abrahamic faiths (Islam, Christianity, Judaism) and still be a Believer. Inherently belief in God is not something that you say or write down. It exists in the depths of your heart and human consciousness. Of which no human can judge. That alone is for God to decide who believed in him and who did not and dispense reward or punishment accordingly.
    Better to Live 1 Day as a Lion then 1000 Years as a Sheep

  5. #155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moosag View Post
    Just to correct you there... Your not a Kafir.
    Kafir's are disbelievers. You have different levels of Kufur (Disbelief).

    Plainly speaking if you completely deny Gods existence then yes you are Kafir.
    Judging by your Faith being Christianity you are also a person of the book (Ahlul Kitab). I.E. You believe in God.

    Just because your book is not the Quraan but the Injeel (Bible) still makes you a believer.

    So no you not a Kafir. Technically a person does not have to subscribe to any of the 3 Abrahamic faiths (Islam, Christianity, Judaism) and still be a Believer. Inherently belief in God is not something that you say or write down. It exists in the depths of your heart and human consciousness. Of which no human can judge. That alone is for God to decide who believed in him and who did not and dispense reward or punishment accordingly.
    Does he still go to "heaven", or is he going to end up somewhere substantially more humid? ..or I suppose it would be more of a dry heat due to the flames..
    [email protected] | [email protected] | GTX 1060 2075/9300 | 250GB 850 EVO | RM550x | LA32D550

  6. #156
    Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Africa.
    Posts
    1,094

    Default

    That would depend on him I guess...

    The whole point of Messengers (Prophets), Revelation (scriptures & books) and Religions is that they are Guidelines on our journey back to the "Source" (and no not the source from Matrix :P) i.e. how to live your life in a manner that 1) keeps you in harmony with the rest of mankind and 2) allows you into heaven

    Mosez books and teachings were applicable to that time frame. Jesus books and teachings were applicable to that time frame. Muhammed's book and teachings are applicable to the end of time. I seriously stand to be corrected here but the timings between the prophets is like Mosez to Jesuz = 1000 - 1500 years Jesus to Muhammad = 600 years and Muhammad to now is 1433 years...

    Essentially if you look at all the 3 main books. The overall message is clear. Behave, do good and dont cause nonsense So if a person chooses to live according to the Torah for example and leads a life of rightousness, does good deeds, etc etc... Then I dont see why he wont go to heaven. Or for e.g. if a person chooses to follow the Bible and leads a good life does good deeds etc... Then again I dont see why he wont go to heaven.

    What is certain is that the day of resurrection or the day of judgement will be our ultimate accountability. No one will escape the ultimate judgement from our creator. He alone knows the parameters by which to judge us.

    So you sitting here in the year 2012 on your computer armed with an armada of information and tools to decide for yourself what is right and wrong. What suits you and what does not, etc.... Ultimately its your choice. It all depends on what your end goal is and what your priority is.

    So lets take for example the Quraan. It covers just about every aspect of human living. Social, Family, Business, Welfare, Cleanliness, Justice, Courts, etc, etc etc etc..... As I am sure the Bible did and as I am sure the Torah did and as I am sure all the other devine scriptures did as well (that I am not aware of).

    Remember that each Prophet was only responsible for delivering the message. In no way will they be responsible for people going wrong and astray or for people who chose not to believe. It was valid then and it is valid now.

    All the information is there. All the tools are there. All the scientific facts are there also which in my opinion all point to a Master Creator anyways. The choice is ultimately yours...
    Better to Live 1 Day as a Lion then 1000 Years as a Sheep

  7. #157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by R/SGT View Post
    ...If you can’t deal with it, well no one is forcing you to stay and try and educate us Kafirs
    Quote Originally Posted by dudewotevr View Post
    Does he still go to "heaven", or is he going to end up somewhere substantially more humid? ..or I suppose it would be more of a dry heat due to the flames..
    Tossed. ("Tossed" does not mean I'm "dissing" you, just that I feel the line is more appropriate to that thread.)

  8. #158
    Super Grandmaster isie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Second star to the right and straight on 'til morning
    Posts
    7,951

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wayfarer View Post
    Tossed. ("Tossed" does not mean I'm "dissing" you, just that I feel the line is more appropriate to that thread.)
    maybe dont use the word tossed (it does sound a bit 'rude')
    Some times the internet is so slow, it would be faster to just fly to Google's headquarters and ask them this $h1t in person.!

  9. #159
    Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Africa.
    Posts
    1,094

    Default

    Hence the disclaimer

    Tosser is rude. Tossed is not.

    I tossed my can into the dustbin.... I tossed a coin at the dude on the corner...
    Better to Live 1 Day as a Lion then 1000 Years as a Sheep

  10. #160

    Default Theocracy's absence from Islam

    "We do not have Theocracy in Islam, but we can have a civil state and an Islamic reference."
    (Tariq Ramadan, Islamic scholar)

    Quote Originally Posted by murraybiscuit View Post
    4. politics

    there seems to be a long history of theocracy when it comes to islam.
    The majority of Muslim scholars, particularly historians and doctors of law, would disagree with your statement. Central to the idea of theocracy is the concept of who the leader is and how the ruler is chosen. It is either God Himself, or some divinely endowed agent of God. The state would be run by this person, assisted by clergy. A typical example of theocracy is the centuries long marriage between the Catholic Church and the State. The Pope fills a divinely sanctioned position, and he is assisted by cardinals to fulfill political leadership.

    In Islam, the ruler/leadership is chosen by the people, and may also be deposed by the people. Because Prophet Muhammad was both the receptacle of revelation and the political leader of the early Muslims, that period may be viewed as a time of Islamic theocracy. But this ended with the death of Prophet Muhammad. Note that his successor, Abu Bakr the first caliph, was titled caliph (deputy) of the Prophet, and not caliph of God.

    Perhaps the reason why so many are under the impression that Islam has a theocratic history is because Muslims have a preference for their own vast legal tradition. This tradition is called Shariah, and in the West it is erroneously over-simplified and mistranslated as Islamic Law and incorrectly compared to codified legal entities such as British common law or French law. However, the diverse evolving tradition of Shariah does have an unambiguous Islamic basis. According to the Quran:

    "... the Quran, a guidance for mankind, and clear proofs of the guidance, and the Criterion (of right and wrong)." (Quran 2:185)
    "And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their way. Say, 'Indeed, the guidance of God is the guidance.' If you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you would have from God no protector or helper." (Quran 2:120)

    When Muslims are democratically given a say in deciding the laws of their societies, it would be rare for them to exclude an overt Islamic reference. A consistent application of the Shariah keeps the rulers in check, and presents a formiddable challenge to attempts at tyranny and oppression. It is not required that rulers be scholars or spiritual masters, but it is a requirement that the relevant scholars (of law, science, social science, etc.) and the common people be consulted when major decisions/rulings are made. The Islamic decision-making model is based on shura, or mutual consultation and concerted efforts at consensus. There is no monopoly on interpretations, no pope or divine figure to formulate or legislate codes, but there are local negotiations that inform law within a particular time and place. A very small number of criminal acts are explicitly defined by the Quran, and the Shariah includes components that are mutable and immutable.

    possibly due to the western influence you've already alluded to.
    It is easy to confuse the despotic systems of middle-eastern powers with the concept of theocracy. But those dictators are not considered as divinely appointed or representing God - on the contrary, it is well-known that they were propped up by Western powers and/or came to power by brutal means. Nor do they legislate strictly according to Shariah. There are about 50 countries with a mainstream Muslim majority, but none of them exclusively apply the Shariah system. Most ascribe to British Common Law, Roman/Dutch Law, French law (Napoleonic code), as well as traditional laws and cultural norms. While Iran and Saudi Arabia claim to implement shariah, it should be noted that neither of these two countries follow mainstream Islam. Iran is Shiah and Saudi Arabia is Wahhabi/Salafi.

    possibly due to the immaturity of politics and lack of nation-states within the arabian peninsula, partly due to lower population densities. i.e. tribalism and religion intertwined.
    It is important to point out that middle-eastern and north African Arabs comprise less than 20% of the world's Muslims, but this group is often the frame of reference for Western understanding of Islam.

    it is conspicuous because it persists, whereas christian theocracies aren't much tolerated any more.
    As has been pointed out, Islamic theocracies have never existed. Christian theocracies are now rare because, firstly, it has been realised that it is problematic to assert that a particular person is a divine agent annointed to rule, and sencondly, the "Law" part of the Christian canon (Pentateuch) is largely regarded as having been abrogated by the New Testament (which is for the most part void of legal content). Thus Christianity does not really have a comprehensive legal code, and this is what predisposed the west to secular law (once Catholicism's political power started to wane).

    continued in next post ...
    Last edited by wayfarer; 21-09-2012 at 07:51 PM.

  11. #161

    Default Secular democracy, theocracy and the Middle Way

    ...continued from previous post

    can there be such a thing as a secular democracy with a muslim majority? or would all muslims want theocracy ultimately?
    Muslims do not need theocracies, but that does not mean that Muslim democracies will exclude Shariah as the underlying legal and practical framework. However, it should be noted that the shariah includes within its tradition the facility for established minorities to be governed by their own laws, especially in the areas of personal law and religion/belief related laws. This precedent was set by Prophet Muhammad himself. This is not regarded as excluding the shariah, but rather as an essential feature of shariah, falling well within its framework. The Muslim view of shariah can be better understood by considering its literal meaning: "a waterway that leads to a main stream, a drinking place, and a road or the correct path.” The Islamic path seeks to facilitate peace and harmony, and represents primordial moderation and excellence that stretches all the way back to Adam, the first human, Muslim and prophet. This wasata, or moderation/balance was renewed by prophet after prophet through the ages, and made universal and abiding by Prophet Muhammad. God says:

    "And we have made you a wasata (median/balanced/moderate) community in order that you may be a testimony/model for humanity." (Quran 2:143)

    is this not the identity crisis which the arab spring has caused? by theocracy i mean a specific god is in the constitution, taught in schools etc, with criminal acts defined by a religious book and the political head is also seen as a spriritual leader.
    Successful Muslim political systems and legal frameworks are not based (or dependent) on theocratic leadership styles.

    The challenge of the Arab spring is not about choices between theocracies and secular democracies, but about being among the pioneers, navigating the community of Islam through negotiations with late modernity. The community is in a state of transition, shedding some of its medieval baggage, setting a new course while remaining true to its divinely decreed primordial core.

    According to Islamic scholar, Timothy Winter ("Contentment" lecture):

    "It took the West 400 years to adapt to modernity... and many of the challenges that the community of Islam faces are there because of having to turn a very sharp corner very quickly. The community is, if you like, like one of those super tankers that take 20 miles in order to change course, because they're so big, and ponderous, and carrying so much, and they have been underway for so long, that you can't suddenly turn them on a new course overnight. If you're a tiny little ship, you can do that, a new religious movement - it can change and adapt because it is light-weight. But a religion like Islam, if it has to change course, which it has to, because that's what ijtihad (continued scholarly efforts to better understand, interpret and operationalise the Divine Message in way that is relevant to the context) is about, and that's what living in a changing world is about, and what the universality of the religion is about, then it's going to take time..."

    Islam provides the tools for this navigation, such as the institution of ijtihad. However, even as the tanker negotiates its course, it remains in tact, its monotheistic creed as clear and pure as ever, and it carries with it a normative Islamic practice represented by approximately 90% of its passengers.
    Last edited by wayfarer; 10-11-2012 at 05:55 PM.

  12. #162

    Default Introduction to Islam

    Thanks wayfarer. It's taking a bit of effort to separate all the constituent components out. I think a large part of my confusion comes from the anarchic/decentralised structure of Islam.

    When it comes to Christianity, the pope or a synod or an elder decides on policy, and followers are generally identifiable by that.

    I was under the impression that due to the location of Mecca and history of Saudi, as well as the vociferous nature of Iran and its ayatollah, that these were politically and socially representative of the aspirations of the greater Muslim populace globally. Again, I think that western media and my culture informed this understanding.

    That's a great excerpt from Timothy Winter, it rings true in the middle east. To be honest, I think the interdependence necessitated by globalization has precipitated the current middle eastern identity crisis, and is the source of a greater crisis to come between state and individual, where ideology and theology become increasingly inefficient tools in justifying the state as a protector of communal and personal interest.
    The causes of human actions are usually immeasurably more complex and varied than our subsequent explanations of them. Fyodor Dostoevsky - The Idiot

  13. #163

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by murraybiscuit View Post
    Thanks wayfarer. It's taking a bit of effort to separate all the constituent components out. I think a large part of my confusion comes from the anarchic/decentralised structure of Islam.
    When it comes to Christianity, the pope or a synod or an elder decides on policy, and followers are generally identifiable by that.
    Definitely decentralised, but I am not sure that I will call it anarchic, given the internal coherence of the mainstream. Perhaps from outside it appears anarchic. Islamic scholars attribute the coherence, order and cohesion of the mainstream to a number of factors, not least of them being the binding and unifying quality of the Noble Quran.

    Timothy Winter explains in his introduction to a lecture:

    "The Muslim nation's greatest achievement over the past millennium has undoubtedly been its internal intellectual cohesion. From the 10th century (CE) almost to the present day, and despite the outward drama of the clash of dynasties, the mainstream Muslims have maintained an almost unfailing attitude of religious respect and brotherhood among themselves. It is a striking fact that virtually no religious wars, riots or persecutions divided them during this extended period, so difficult in other ways.

    The history of religious movements suggests that this is an unusual outcome. The normal sociological view, as expounded by Max Weber and his disciples, is that religions enjoy an initial period of unity, and then descend into an increasingly bitter factionalism led by rival hierarchies. Christianity has furnished the most obvious example of this; but one could add many others, including secular faiths such as Marxism. On the face of it, Islam's ability to avoid this fate is astonishing, and demands careful analysis..."


    The decentralisation of religious authority in Islam is pivotal for safeguarding Islam's integrity, universality and contextual validity and applicability. Also, Islam has no requisite spiritual intermediaries, as God is ever close, at once transcendent and immanent. The Quran states:

    "We indeed created man; and We know what his soul whispers within him, and We are nearer to him than the jugular vein." (Quran 50:16)

    However, Muslims know all too well that it would be foolhardy to ignore the guidance of present-day scholars of jurisprudence, creed, spirituality, etc., as these are the inheritors of a phenomenal legacy. Still, every individual may pursue the acquisition sacred knowledge, and there is no concept of clerical ordainment in Islam.

    I was under the impression that due to the location of Mecca and history of Saudi...
    Are you refering to the history where the Saud family joined forces with the extremist Wahhabis (Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, forerunner of Wahhabism, married the daughter of Ibn Saud, founder of Saudi Arabia) and proceeded, in the 1800s, to butcher 4000 Muslims in Taif, massacre thousands more in Iraq... to the point of having committed, by 1925, 40 000 beheadings and 350 000 amputations of Muslims who refused to buy into Wahhabi flat-earth extremism? Thus was founded the self-declared great Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, originally aligned with Britain, and then with the USA after oil discovery. (Read article by Shafiq Morton, veteran South African journalist, published earlier this month.)

    ... as well as the vociferous nature of Iran and its ayatollah, that these were politically and socially representative of the aspirations of the greater Muslim populace globally.
    Did you know that the vociferous Iran and its ayatollah engage in the systematic persecution of and discrimination against mainstream Muslims? Mainstream Muslims are barred from most government positions, even in majority mainstream provinces. Mainstream Muslims are further prevented from holding congregational Friday prayers, and it was even declared illegal for them to hold their own Eid prayers. There are over a million mainstream Muslims in the capital, Tehran, but authorities refuse permission for them to build even a single mosque.

    Again, I think that western media and my culture informed this understanding.
    I guess so. But I commend you for tugging at the "Western-centric blinkers" and for having an open mind. But in the Middle-east the situation is the same, and perhaps you are aware of the many distortions that Middle-easterners have of the West...
    Last edited by wayfarer; 10-11-2012 at 05:58 PM.

  14. #164

    Default

    Found this interesting... Hope others do too?

    http://explore.org/#!/videos/player/...ing-with-jihad
    Peidiwch ‚ gadael i'r bastardiaid malu chi i lawr
    >trolls hate being trolled<
    Gadewch iddynt ymdreiglwch ei ben ei hun yn eu nonsens hunain

  15. #165
    Karmic Sangoma ghoti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hotel California
    Posts
    44,014
    Blog Entries
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by murraybiscuit View Post
    Thanks wayfarer. It's taking a bit of effort to separate all the constituent components out. I think a large part of my confusion comes from the anarchic/decentralised structure of Islam.
    Thats so not true of Islam.... Like any organized religion they have structures. Each denomination has its leaders.
    Schrodingers immigrants : Simultaneously stealing your job and too lazy to work.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 66 FirstFirst ... 7891011121314152161 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. My introduction
    By AnetteW in forum First Posts, Intros, Forum Questions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 30-06-2012, 08:49 AM
  2. Introduction
    By ISman in forum First Posts, Intros, Forum Questions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 26-05-2012, 02:47 PM
  3. New introduction here
    By Monermajetomi in forum First Posts, Intros, Forum Questions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-04-2011, 10:27 AM
  4. Introduction...
    By Cybermoo in forum Apple Mac, iPad and iPhone
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 15-05-2008, 12:18 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •