Is Islam in need of a moral reformation?

[pittsflyer]

If you say so, then you can go live amoung them in Yemn or Oman, Iran, saudi, etc. Jews are not Muslims but I know liberals like to mis apply pre established hot button adjectives to get an emotional response.

How anti-Semitic of you.

And no, they revere Jesus.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

With as much as the author in the OP wants Muslims to abandon, you might as well call on them to abandon the whole thing like he did. I think its actually more respectful to Muslims just to tell them that Mohammed was a con man and the Koran is a pack of lies, than to presume to lecture them on how Islam should be practiced. If offending Muslims can't be helped, at least we can avoid patronizing them.

 

[football5680]

I was speaking of the OT. If you can denounce the OT while leaving it in your holy book, why won't you accept that many Muslims denounce certain parts of their holy book? If you're going to give members of your own religion the benefit of the doubt, you should do the same for other groups.

Many of the laws in the Old Testament were directed at the Israelites and many no longer apply because Christians are under a New Covenant. If God has established laws that are still binding on Christians then you cannot denounce it and still say you are a believer and the same thing applies to Muslims.

In the Quran you will find certain commandments that contradict one another but there is a system in place to see which one still applies. Whichever verse was revealed later is the one that applies and this is called abrogation. The Quran says that Muslims cannot be believers unless they find in themselves no resistance to the Quran and commandments of Muhammad. So if a Muslim denounced something then they are apostates and the punishment for this crime is death.

 

[Strathos]

I can say with certainty that no muslim ever condemns quran.Period.

In the unlikely event if any body finds such a practicing Muslim I would be open to revise my statement that May be there are 0.00001 % muslims who do that.

No, but you will find Muslims who make excuses for it and say things like "well, this doesn't really mean what it seems to mean, it actually means something else".

 

[football5680]

No, but you will find Muslims who make excuses for it and say things like "well, this doesn't really mean what it seems to mean, it actually means something else".

Muslims also use the Hadith which is the traditions of what Muhammad and his companions said. These traditions contain interpretations of what the verses in the Quran mean so whenever somebody tries to reinterpret the Quran in a different way, Muhammad usually blocks this interpretation. In the West most people know nothing about Islam so Muslims can make these claims but they wouldn't do this if the audience had any knowledge of the religion.

 

[DevinF]

So you only decide things based on how long something has existed? You don't care about morality?



I don't see how the bold bit is anti-Semitic. I think the world would be better if Islam disappear, but I'd say that about Christianity and Judaism too.

But I can see how saying 'Islam is anti-christ', but not Judaism, is prejudice.

Hello Paradoxum,
Who defines morality?

 

[Paradoxum]

Hello Paradoxum,
Who defines morality?

Me.

 

[DevinF]

Me.

Lol

 

[True Scotsman]

And how! They also need to take a look at their metaphysics and epistemology and politics.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Theres a lo of smart belavior in Islam. What I dont argree with is a totalitarian interpretation, or "enjoining the wrong and forbidding the right" whiich seems to be an inversion of the faith by some poeple bent on undermining the moral strengths of non-muslim cultures. But salam alay cum all the same, we're all brothers. If the declaration of human rights can say this, why not muslims?

 

[SteveB28]

It doesn't need a reformation. It needs an Enlightenment, just as Christendom did. The most effective tool for drawing the fangs of any religion is - education and knowledge.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

So why is it that the middle classes are organising the terror? Its not a grassroots revolution, but top down. these people are not in ignorant of western science and logic, they just feel repelled at the idea of graffiti art on the kabba (holy site of Islam) etc. Or 'believing men and women' with in some back alley somewhere etc. At least, thats my interpretation...

Plus, stikewhen vulnerable,asthe axis powers are starting to fellthe bite ofthe rise ofthe "brics" (brazil, russia, india, china and something else) economies.

 

[SteveB28]

So why is it that the middle classes are organising the terror? Its not a grassroots revolution, but top down. these people are not in ignorant of western science and logic, they just feel repelled at the idea of graffiti art on the kabba (holy site of Islam) etc. Or 'believing men and women' with in some back alley somewhere etc. At least, thats my interpretation...

Plus, stikewhen vulnerable,asthe axis powers are starting to fellthe bite ofthe rise ofthe "brics" (brazil, russia, india, china and something else) economies.

Could you please read that back to yourself and tell me if it makes sense to you?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Ok it makes sense to me but some of the allusions werent that straightforward. And a couple of typos didnt help. So apologies...

But in any case "Islam" is not a monolith, at the moment in any case. So "Islam" doesnt need reforming, not in all areas anyway. There are so many sects and differences of opinion, its like a mosaic.

I think that if you want to progress then maybe set up some smart targets, rather than debate big scale changes online. Expecting to topple empires etc.

I have debated with secularists over at Project Reason, and theyre like as if "snubbing me" because I'm a muslim, or so it appears. And then they're discussing how to support this or that reformist Saidi scholar.

Its like politics gone a bit crazy to me.

For me a progressive way forwards is happening here at CF where all people are made welcome. Not some secularistic clique, or a Christian clique, or Muuslim clique but a model for an open society.

A bit like as suggested by a Jewish rabbi - "we build this house together". Meaning multiculturalism has failed to some degree, and we need to have a collective social spirit rather than focus on differentiation.

If I could suggest anything it would be to add some CF "friends" (i.e. links to other forums) in the interfaith cummunity, Muslim and Jew forums etc that are open enough to link in socially to others online. Rather than some form of social isolationism, and cultiral introversion.

Im basing this on an idea form complexity theory where the theory is if people are well mixed as ethnic groups, then theres less likelihood of tensions. Either that or segregate and seperate, but I'd prefer to live in a mixed society.

See the idea of hubs and nodes in networks etc. Ecosystems theory etc. Creating and supporting equivalents of "breeding grounds" for peace, if you'll forgive the clumsy metaphor, analogous to marine protection zones or protected habitats on the land. These may be ecological hubs which if lost have bad consequences, but if supported can lead to a flourishing ecosystem.

That would be my idea rather than try to set out to reform others faiths - which may just lead to more fights (due to fight or flight syndrome).If two or so seperate ecosystems are suddely linked, then theres probably going to be conflict between species (or cultures) which have grown apart, though. So theres always a danger too.

 

[SteveB28]

It is not possible to "set out to reform others faiths". That isn't how things work. People reform their faith themselves, as a result of having their knowledge and understanding enlightened.

No-one forcibly caused Christianity to stop hunting witches, burning non-believers and chasing 'Demons' out of the mentally ill. The influence for change was the explosion of scientific discovery which began after the 16th Century. Advances in medicine, agriculture, civil engineering, cosmology, etc brought with it a realisation that people's lives were noticeably better as they resisted the superstition and the dogma of the past. Christians themselves challenged the old order and there has been no looking back since.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Islam has a bit of an inbiuilt anti reform mechanism. "Bidah" (innovation) is seen to be bad. Then again there are myriad "veriosns" of the faith. And bak to reform, there are warnings in the koran that unbelievers will not give up till you follow them, and their "vain desires" etc instead of the faith. Satan being the ultimate leader and deciever.

 

[SteveB28]

Islam has a bit of an inbiuilt anti reform mechanism. "Bidah" (innovation) is seen to be bad.

And so it used to be with Christianity. At one time, simply being able to read could bring a charge of witchcraft or sorcery. The Enlightenment period slowly changed all that. Learning and knowledge came to be revered, not feared. This led to the disempowerment of superstition and dogma.

Islam is overdue for the same experience.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

And so it used to be with Christianity. At one time, simply being able to read could bring a charge of witchcraft or sorcery. The Enlightenment period slowly changed all that. Learning and knowledge came to be revered, not feared. This led to the disempowerment of superstition and dogma.

The West's system of learning, the university system, has its origins in the Middle Ages. Far from fearing learning and knowledge, the clergy were the most learned people of their time.

Islam is overdue for the same experience.

The Enlightment was the continuation of a process of cultural evolution that had been underway for many centuries - we don't see anything like those kinds of social trends in Islam. Early modern Europe, before the Enlightenment, was already a dynamic civilization, far ahead of China, and still in the throes of a meteoric rise.

The Middle East today is nothing like that. It's stagnant, and over the past few centuries, if anything, it's been trending in the opposite direction.

 

[SteveB28]

Insofar as that learning served the narrow confines of religious dogma, yes it was encouraged. However, at any point in which enquiry challenged those dogmatic beliefs, it was rejected and the people engaged in it were frequently persecuted. Estimates have been made as to the extent of the 'brake' that religion, in particular Christianity, applied to the growth in human knowledge. It is often calculated at around 3 centuries.

And the social trends that you refer to were once present in the Islamic world. Much of the science and mathematics which fuelled the upsurge of research in the West actually came about as a result of Islamic scholars transferring their knowledge; eg, the Moorish occupation of Spain. If the Islamic world once embraced new knowledge, it should be possible for them once again to establish such a tradition.

They have to do it, of course.

 

[SteveB28]

Sorry, I repeated the message