by Simon 1524 Replies latest members adult
Simon:
I don't think mainstream Muslims can make the same claim which is why their opposition to it seems rather week.
Who cares? What makes you think you have any authority to assert the way Muslims should interpret their own religion? Mainstream Muslims obviously have a much better understanding of the mainstream interpretations of their 'holy book' than you do.
Who cares?
Anyone who has to live on the planet and in a community is allowed to care about it's future.
What makes you think you have any authority to assert the way Muslims should interpret their own religion? Mainstream Muslims obviously have a much better understanding of the mainstream interpretations of their 'holy book' than you do.
Because everyone is allowed to have an opinion and if they chose to interpret things too literally then shame on them.
We have laws and standards of common decency and if they are chosing to break them or promote an ideology that incites other people to break them then I think we all have a part to play in objecting to that and muslims have a bigger responsibility to do so.
The probem is exactly what you describe - how mainstream muslims have chosen to interpret their holy book. I think if they have been teaching this stuff for years it's laid the groundwork for the radicalization of a lot of youth who hear a message that is hardly different than what they have been brought up on with just an extra call to action.
Simon:
Anyone who has to live on the planet and in a community is allowed to care about it's future.
That's shifting the goalposts. The question who cares was about your assertion about what 'true' Muslims believe.
The question who cares was about your assertion about what 'true' Muslims believe.
Well we can only go off what they tell us their beliefs are and a sizeable majority say that they treat the quran as the word of god so that would seem to be it. I have not seen many muslims saying that they do not believe the things that ISIS are using to justify their actions. Have you? Do you not think this is important at all?
You have an incredibly weak argument if your only objection is whether someone should be allowed to voice an opinion or not.
Simon:
You have an incredibly weak argument if your only objection is whether someone should be allowed to voice an opinion or not.
Shifting the goalposts again. I never suggested you don't have a right to state your opinion. It's just that your opinion isn't backed by any authority on the subject and contradicts the statements of people of the religion in question who have uniformly condemned the actions of ISIS (though this has been largely ignored by much of the mainstream media).
Shifting the goalposts again. I never suggested you don't have a right to state your opinion. It's just that your opinion isn't backed by any authority on the subject and contradicts the statements of people of the religion in question who have uniformly condemned the actions of ISIS (though this has been largely ignored by much of the mainstream media).
It IS backed:
Yes, mainstream muslims condemn the actions but they are not saying that they do not share their beliefs of the teachings being the word of their god which is a different thing entirely. When muslims call for the teachings in the quran to be questioned then they are attacked and accused of not being 'real muslims' as you'll see in the comments from the huffington post article I posted earlier and from history (Rushdie etc...).
So I'm sorry but the evidence totally support my opinion and suggests that yours is dead wrong and I am not the one shifting goalposts.
Please show me an authority of islam that says that what the quran says is wrong. You know you'll struggle to find one which is why you are trying to argue about something else - whether the actions of ISIS should be condemned (a pretty easy no-brainer call for anyone to make).
The variable interpretation and adherence of the Quran's writings by secular offshoot arms of this particular religious belief is the issue,
since there is not a focal power structure in this religious belief, such as what can be seen in the structural framework of the Catholic religion.
.
Without a strong controlling head of this faith it leaves the door open for separate individual groups to orchestrate and conduct their own
perceived way of interpretation of the Quran, which has proved to be a very dangerous liability for the rest of humanity as history has shown.
.
Simon:
So I'm sorry but the evidence totally support my opinion and suggests that yours is dead wrong and I am not the one shifting goalposts.
Incorrect. I have already explained the manner in which you shifted the goalposts from my statement - whether anyone should care about your personal opinions about Islam - to your separate claim of caring about the future.
Please show me an authority of islam that says that what the quran says is wrong. You know you'll struggle to find one which is why you are trying to argue about something else - whether the actions of ISIS should be condemned (a pretty easy no-brainer call for anyone to make).
It's not necessary to 'show' that the quran is 'wrong' per se, since the 'holy book' of Christians (and even more so the 'holy book' of Jews) say to commit atrocities as well, yet the mainstream views of both those religions are accepted as 'peaceful'. (All of these so-called 'holy books' contain a great deal of potentially dangerous superstitious nonsense, but that also is not the point.)
Previously in this thread I already summed up that all of these religions have degrees of interpretation ranging from dangerous to irrelevant.
@Jeffro - I think Simon's onto something here.
I also think there's a subtle difference between the OT and the Quran. The violent OT scriptures are just descriptions of what ancient Israelites and/or Yahweh did - they're not commands for modern Jews to commit genocide. Some Quranic verses - slay the disbelievers, strike at their necks, etc - seem to be open-ended commands if read literally. This is the problem.
Incorrect. I have already explained the manner in which you shifted the goalposts from my statement - whether anyone should care about your personal opinions about Islam - to your separate claim of caring about the future.
Everyone can care or care not about anyone elses opinion as they choose. I don't see what you imagine your point is other than a lame way of saying "I don't like your opinion ... but can't think of any specific counter argument"
It's not necessary to 'show' that the quran is 'wrong' per se, since the 'holy book' of Christians (and even more so the 'holy book' of Jews) say to commit atrocities as well, yet the mainstream views of both those religions are accepted as 'peaceful'. (All of these so-called 'holy books' contain a great deal of potentially dangerous superstitious nonsense, but that also is not the point.)
I think it is necessary to show that it is wrong / no longer valid / out of date (however you want to present it).
The big difference between christianity and islam is that christianity doesn't claim the dangerous beliefs as still current. It's a HUGE difference.
What makes things very easy for islamic extremists is that the extreme beliefs are taught as being a current part of mainstream islam. That is the problem and that is what has to change. That is what reformist muslims want to change but are not getting any help because liberal do-nothings who want to be politically correct start shouting "racism" as soon as anyone criticises the hateful beliefs.
Previously in this thread I already summed up that all of these religions have degrees of interpretation ranging from dangerous to irrelevant.
Yes, and the simple fact is that even mainstream islam has way more of the current teachings that contain dangerous sentiment. Christianity grew up, islam is still living in the dark ages.
The reaosn you want to argue about opinion is you cannot argue about the facts.
