Islam is better than its adherents

[Montalban]

Revised my post, because my previous post is incorrect.

So where are we up to now?

 

[Montalban]

Ok, now tell me the isnaad of this hadeeth, and we will discuss. also, give me some quotes from Islamic scholars on their opinion on this hadeeth.

I made the statement. You didn't answer it. Instead you asked I post the Hadith. I posted it. You now again switch the goal-posts.

 

[Nooj]

So where are we up to now?

That would be this:

"Actually, the thread title is misleading. I am suggesting that some people practicing Islam do not live up to the ideals of Islam. I am not suggesting that we discuss the merits of Islamic ideals.

I am talking about why the Saudi Arabian government is so negligent towards its foreign workers, in contrast to the humanitarian commandments of Islam. There are parts of Islam that I disagree morally with, but I'm not talking about that here. I am certainly not talking about how evil Islam is. Please create another thread for that sort of discussion."

I know you're pretty adept at finding bad parts of Islam, what good parts of Islam do you think Muslims are failing at?

 

[bengurion]

Book 041, Number 6983:Abdullah b. ‘Umar reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: You and the Jews would fight against one another until a stone would say: Muslim, here is a Jew behind me; come and kill him.Self-explanatory hadith.

 

[français]

I made the statement. You didn't answer it. Instead you asked I post the Hadith. I posted it. You now again switch the goal-posts.

Because you seem to think that all hadiths in Sahih Bukhari are authentic when they are not. You need to understand the isnaad and the tafsir before you can derive your own conclusion.

So, show me the isnaad, and show me what the ijmaa is on this hadith. Until you do this, we can not further the discussion because you have not looked into the meaning of this hadith.

 

[Montalban]

That would be this:

"Actually, the thread title is misleading. I am suggesting that some people practicing Islam do not live up to the ideals of Islam. I am not suggesting that we discuss the merits of Islamic ideals.

I am talking about why the Saudi Arabian government is so negligent towards its foreign workers, in contrast to the humanitarian commandments of Islam. There are parts of Islam that I disagree morally with, but I'm not talking about that here. I am certainly not talking about how evil Islam is. Please create another thread for that sort of discussion."

I know you're pretty adept at finding bad parts of Islam, what good parts of Islam do you think Muslims are failing at?

I don't think that there are any good parts in Islam. The notion of 'good' needs to be examined, if that won't side-track you thread.

Nothing is good of itself. It's only good, if it's from God.

And thus it's easy at being adept at this because there's so many bad things.

But you've simply created a thread which still needs to look at the ideals of Islam - you ask this again in your challenge just put to me... except you only want to look at 'good' ideals.

 

[peaceful soul]

Because you seem to think that all hadiths in Sahih Bukhari are authentic when they are not. You need to understand the isnaad and the tafsir before you can derive your own conclusion.

So, show me the isnaad, and show me what the ijmaa is on this hadith. Until you do this, we can not further the discussion because you have not looked into the meaning of this hadith.

Français, exactly how do we know that all them even have authentic isnads, let alone that they are true just because they have a proper isnad? I think that Muslims use this argument in part so that they can claim that anything that doesn't support their position can be put into question, whereas many more of the sayings of Mohammad should equally be put into question since the chain of transmissions do not guarantee that what was reported is actually accurate, let alone even true. Also consider the fact that these collections were not consolidated until many decades after Mohammad's death. The chains of transmission were not attempted to be verified until there was a need to challenge many sayings that were found to contradict each other. I an not trying to derail the thread, but am bringing to your mind the imperfections of your point.

 

[peaceful soul]

I don't think that there are any good parts in Islam. The notion of 'good' needs to be examined, if that won't side-track you thread.

Nothing is good of itself. It's only good, if it's from God.

And thus it's easy at being adept at this because there's so many bad things.

But you've simply created a thread which still needs to look at the ideals of Islam - you ask this again in your challenge just put to me... except you only want to look at 'good' ideals.

I would also agree that what is deemed good needs to be examined. For example, Islams says that it is good to be modest, but the catch is that it uses moral legalism to achieve this. Islam claims to create holy people by preventing them from doing certain sins such as drinking alcohol, stealing and practicing homosexuality. The problem is that such punishments as cutting off limbs and putting homosexuals to death for their homosexuality are not good. So, if just look at the presumed good on the surface, we will see a negative underneath. This is what I believe is the case of all systems that go against God's Will. Islam would be no different. That would be why I hate the religion/ideology of Islam.

You can't honestly or should I say, truly investigate the good things without also weighing the bad things since the complete system depends upon both as a true representation of its moral/spiritual standing. That is my observation in a nutshell.

 

[Montalban]

Français, exactly how do we know that all them even have authentic isnads, let alone that they are true just because they have a proper isnad? I think that Muslims use this argument in part so that they can claim that anything that doesn't support their position can be put into question, whereas many more of the sayings of Mohammad should equally be put into question since the chain of transmissions do not guarantee that what was reported is actually accurate, let alone even true. Also consider the fact that these collections were not consolidated until many decades after Mohammad's death. The chains of transmission were not attempted to be verified until there was a need to challenge many sayings that were found to contradict each other. I an not trying to derail the thread, but am bringing to your mind the imperfections of your point.

Further to this, I've posted on another thread where he and I had discussed this same Hadith in the past. He didn't lodge any objection against its authenticity then.

 

[Montalban]

I would also agree that what is deemed good needs to be examined. For example, Islams says that it is good to be modest, but the catch is that it uses moral legalism to achieve this. Islam claims to create holy people by preventing them from doing certain sins such as drinking alcohol, stealing and practicing homosexuality. The problem is that such punishments as cutting off limbs and putting homosexuals to death for their homosexuality are not good. So, if just look at the presumed good on the surface, we will see a negative underneath. This is what I believe is the case of all systems that go against God's Will. Islam would be no different. That would be why I hate the religion/ideology of Islam.

You can't honestly or should I say, truly investigate the good things without also weighing the bad things since the complete system depends upon both as a true representation of its moral/spiritual standing. That is my observation in a nutshell.

Indeed. She's got to be 'modest' to stop a man from desiring to rape her. That's 'good' in Islam. It's evil in other idealogies because it makes the man less culpable for his own actions.

 

[Cirke]

But is it an ideology or just custom? All people from Middle east share this kind of cultural custom? Do they not? They are all practice this "head covering" and "modesty" since the Abrahimic times. I am not sure if Islam is the only religion in the region that practiced it. Is it part of the Law of Hebrew people? A woman must have her head covered not only for man but for God, so that she is modest. I do not understand how this is only a Islamic phenomenon.

 

[peaceful soul]

Indeed. She's got to be 'modest' to stop a man from desiring to rape her. That's 'good' in Islam. It's evil in other idealogies because it makes the man less culpable for his own actions.

Indeed, Montalban. It is as if women don't desire men too, and that Allah made man predestined to sin by making women so lustful. That is the picture that I get.

 

[peaceful soul]

But is it an ideology or just custom? All people from Middle east share this kind of cultural custom? Do they not? They are all practice this "head covering" and "modesty" since the Abrahimic times. I am not sure if Islam is the only religion in the region that practiced it. Is it part of the Law of Hebrew people? A woman must have her head covered not only for man but for God, so that she is modest. I do not understand how this is only a Islamic phenomenon.

As mentioned before, the reasons for covering in the OT and NT are not parallel to the Islamic reasons.

What you need to understand is that Islam incorporated some of these cultural norms into its religion; therefore, these practices are no longer culturally relative to Muslims. The other things to look at is that even if something is not religiously obligated, the fact that Islam allows or tolerates it puts into question whether Islam actually is against it.

 

[Cirke]

As mentioned before, the reasons for covering in the OT and NT are not parallel to the Islamic reasons.

What you need to understand is that Islam incorporated some of these cultural norms into its religion; therefore, these practices are no longer culturally relative to Muslims. The other things to look at is that even if something is not religiously obligated, the fact that Islam allows or tolerates it puts into question whether Islam actually is against it.

They might not be parallel but they are still "practices" that were part of the society and a common thread for the people of the middle east, thus they cannot be "isolated" and seen in the light of the religion of Islam alone. It is like taking "singling out" women at worship in Judaism, Christianity and Islam int he middle East. Women worship in "special areas" away from men. Does this mean that women are inferior to men? Some Christians do practice today in Middle East "seperation" of sexes during worship. etc.

The only point I can see is that Islam has made it mandatory for women to 'cover their head" while others do not, and the same applies in other practices. Still there are women who are Mulsim and do not cover their head...Do they belong to the "liberal" movement in Islam? or there is not such a thing?

 

[Montalban]

But is it an ideology or just custom? All people from Middle east share this kind of cultural custom? Do they not? They are all practice this "head covering" and "modesty" since the Abrahimic times. I am not sure if Islam is the only religion in the region that practiced it. Is it part of the Law of Hebrew people? A woman must have her head covered not only for man but for God, so that she is modest. I do not understand how this is only a Islamic phenomenon.

That's not the issue. The issue is why its done. You may have missed what I wrote earlier in this very thread.

Modesty is not the domain of any one faith/society. Many share this idea that it is a thing of privacy to keep parts covered up. There might even be health and safety concerns for protecting sensitive parts.

The thing about Islam is the belief that a woman must cover herself up to protect herself from the desires of men who don't seem to be able to control these desires; that they have to do this because of someone else's desires.

If I saw a woman wearing a Hijab like covering who was Buddhist I'd not obeject UNLESS I found out that within Buddhism they had a belief system lowering women to something less than a man (as Islam teaches women are less in intelligence)

No one who knows the religion of Islam would say that it is the religion of equality...‘because Allaah has made one of them to excel the other’ i.e., because men are superior to women and are better than women.
http://islamqa.com/en/ref/1105


From the same site
" The Qur’aan states that the testimony of one man is equivalent to the testimony of two women."

"And men are different in intellectual terms, for men are known for their strength of understanding and their memory as compared to women. Women are weaker than men in memory and forget more than men do. This is well known, for most of the reputable scholars in the world are men. There are some women who are more intelligent and have better memories than some men, but this does not cancel out the general rule. Most cases are as we have described above.

With regard to emotions, men speak of them when they get angry or when they are happy, but women are affected by the slightest emotional effects, so their tears flow at the slightest emotional provocation."

 

[Montalban]

They might not be parallel but they are still "practices" that were part of the society and a common thread for the people of the middle east, thus they cannot be "isolated" and seen in the light of the religion of Islam alone. It is like taking "singling out" women at worship in Judaism, Christianity and Islam int he middle East. Women worship in "special areas" away from men. Does this mean that women are inferior to men? Some Christians do practice today in Middle East "seperation" of sexes during worship. etc.

The only point I can see is that Islam has made it mandatory for women to 'cover their head" while others do not, and the same applies in other practices. Still there are women who are Mulsim and do not cover their head...Do they belong to the "liberal" movement in Islam? or there is not such a thing?

I apologise, I noted that what I'd said earlier was on this thread. It is on another thread. I've now posted the essence of the argument of difference in the post above.

 

[anatolian]

People, I have given up talking to montalban.Now I am happy.It's a more healthy thing.Just do it

 

[Philothei]

yeah just like the ostritch...hiding its head in the sand....lol...Not very healthy for the orstrich though.

(Greece- Russia 1-2 We are out... see how you will "hold" up )

 

[Montalban]

.Just do it

 

[Montalban]

yeah just like the ostritch...hiding its head in the sand....lol...Not very healthy for the orstrich though.

G'day, Philothei.

I'm still waiting for the author of the OP to come back to show how we can examine Moslems against the ideals of Islam without examining them against the ideals of Islam.

The idea of 'good' in Islam is simply to do al-Lah's will. And that may not even lead to al-Lah 'rewarding' you with heaven.