What does Isl�m mean to you?

[Pazuzu bin Hanbi]

Hello there folks. When I used to follow Isl�m, I always wanted to know people’s reasons why they turned to this religion, and what made them strong in their faith, what experiences they had. I admired, about the Christian community, their dedication to a living, breathing connection to their saviour.

In Isl�m, I mostly read boring, dry, legalistic, copy & paste type texts which would bang on at length about the necessities of praying, fasting, and suchlike. To which I would reply: “I know. It’s in the qur’�n.� I wanted more personal details, such as when my father told me he turned to the qur’�n for solace and comfort after his father died, and grew more and more religious.

So, I ask you: what does Isl�m mean to you? Personally?

I would also like to ask this of any non–muslims reading this as well: you may hear about muslims in the news, know a few people who have turned to Isl�m and whatnot, but what does it mean to YOU?

[EduChris]

...I don't think the present state of the Islamic faith has much to do with the problems of its origins...

In some respects this is true; many Muslims today accept the Islamic idealization of Mohammad and are not even aware of some of the unsavory things that ancient Islamic records reveal about him. However, as Pazuzu has stated, there is a great deal of injustice within Islam's inherited "common law" that cannot be easily changed (whether or not any particular Muslims today possess any critical awareness of the origins of their faith).

[cnorman18]

A question for you, are you an Orthodox Jew? & Do you support the Zionism?

No, I am not Orthodox.

I have dealt with Zionism vis-a-vis Judaism here, on the other thread you started on that subject. There are a lot of unwarranted assumptions, myths, misperceptions and ill feeling associated with the term "Zionism"; I hope we can rise above all that and discuss it in nonrancorous and realistic terms.

[Goat]

Objectively and frankly, Islam was Mohammad's ticket to self-aggrandizement.

Thats the standard opinion of a Christian, mankind always differs in opinion and muslims have the parallel opinion with Paul.

I know there are some good people who are Muslims. And if Mohammad's character and moral example had been better, more Muslims today would fall into the category of "sincere, kind, peaceful, and trustworthy."

What do you know about Muhammad besides the battles he encountered and his wives? That is almost the only thing pro-christian websites talk about.

I find it's attitudes towards women in those countries high restrictive, and it is not letting women reach their potential.

I share your opinion too, but i base it on tradition more than i base it on religion.
Have you ever talked to a muslim lady and asked for her opinions?

Yes, I have. One had left Iran because it became much too restrictive, the other had a big conflict with her family, because she was not as 'obedient' as they wanted her to be. It seems to me that this restriction is very regional.. and some places are much more restrictive than others. Women in Egypt has much more of a chance to make something of themselves rather than someone from the boonies of Afghanistan . I would not want to be a woman in a number of Islamic countries, but others are much less restrictive.

I also look to see how the attitudes towards woman are defended on this board by male Muslims, and I find that they are often don't realize how chauvinistic they are when they explain things.

It's one thing to realize that Mohammad had those attitudes, he was a man of his time. It's another thing to justify having those attitudes in the modern age using him as a model.

Its most likely the woman's Father/Mother that dont allow her to get an education and its also the ideology that the Taliban share. Yet again, i dont see how the Taliban put poisonous gas in girl schools and call themselves muslims......
Really shameful and words cant explain the hypocrisy of what a 'muslim' is.
Thankfully, this tradition is steadily dying out. And it would die out faster if the media wasn't fueling and creating more extremists in the middle east.

I hope it does die out. It is those traditions, and how women's rights are handled in such places as the Gaza strip, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iran (and other places) that disturb me, as well as how Sharia law is handled when it comes to punishments and executions. The more liberal forms of Islam I don't have any issues with. It is more regional and cultural, but it is being highly ingrained into the culture by justifying it via the Koran and religion.

[EduChris]

...ant explain the hypocrisy of what a 'muslim' is.
Thankfully, this tradition is steadily dying out. And it would die out faster if the media wasn't fueling and creating more extremists in the middle east...

This doesn't seem true as far as I can tell. What evidence do you have that Islamic extremism is dying out? And what is "the media" doing that somehow "creates" these Islamic extremists? Which media are you talking about? Western media? Al Jazeera?

[Woland]

Hello cnorman18,

As I read this, I was struck by the fact that most, if not all, of it could also be said of Judaism, and Christianity too.

I disagree, and I will explain why below.

Abraham fit the description you apply here to Muhammad - he was certainly a wealthy man with some failings of his own

I do not believe that Judaism nor Christianity look up to Abraham the way that most Muslims -in my experience- look up to Muhammad, that is to say as a great virtuous moral example, something he proclaims himself to be in the Quran.

Muhammad was a torturer and a bandit, a polygamous, greedy and violent warlord who, among untold numbers of nefarious deeds, genocided an entire tribe and enslaved countless women and children.

- but I don't think the present state of the Islamic faith has much to do with the problems of its origins any more than the present state of Judaism has to do with the difficulties of ITS origins;

How so?

Can you show me where and how even modest numbers of Muslims are striving to be different than Muhammad by acknowledging his failures as a human and moving past the personality cult mentality?

likewise with Christianity. Paul was apparently rather ignorant of, or out of touch with, the normative Judaism of his own day; but Judaism, Christianity AND Islam have changed a good deal, in some ways radically, from the days of their founding.

My contention is that there was space for loopholes in Christianity and Judaism that allows its modern followers to reduce their cognitive dissonance to a minimal level. In other words, they adapt their beliefs so that they believe in (what seems to them to be) an unfalsifiable God concept, since there is no valid evidence for any deity, religious claims involving the same, or supernatural phenomena whatsoever.

Where was that space for loopholes? Well, many modern Christians, for example, look to the O.T. and note the many authors and calls to violence and rationalize this by such excuses as "the Bible is inspired by God but written by humans from their perspective" etc.

Jewish people -I'm no expert in Judaism- seem to distance themselves from the literal beliefs and personality cult even more for various reasons.

There is no such loophole in Islam. The immense majority of all the Muslims who ever lived, I believe, would agree that the Quran is dictated by Allah and flawless as well as immaculate. They just happen to twist the interpretations to different extents for various reasons, but they seem to all agree that the Quran is the literal unadulterated word of God himself and that Muhammad was a virtuous man - not just for his time. Note also that there are no possible slippery explanations for certain things in Islam - like the right of a man to physically discipline his wife "if the circumstances are right".

Do you understand why this makes a difference and prevents or at least severely hinders true progress in the faith?

Every one of the Abrahamic faiths has problems, contradictions, and aspects that puzzle believers and nonbelievers alike; I think it's more productive, and less conducive to prejudice, rancor, and conflict, to consider the negative AND THE POSITIVE aspects of these faiths in the present day, never mind where they came from.

Islam brings nothing that is new to human philosophy, but it incites backwardness in societies based on it and explicitly orders basic human rights violations.

From where I sit, certain iterations of Islam have some pretty severe problems, and more in some nations than in others; that's obvious to all. But I don't think that's necessarily an indictment of the faith as a whole.

What's an actual indictment of the Islamic faith as a whole is the absence of any loophole that allows believers to delude themselves into dismissing actions "apparently" condoned by their God out of hand.

During the Middle Ages, Islam was far more humane, scientifically receptive and innovative, and just than Christianity ever contemplated being. Judaism as a whole, or nearly so, has occasionally gone over the edge into nuttiness and self-destructiveness; the disastrous Bar Kokhba revolt comes to mind, as well as Haredi and "settler" extremism in Israel in the present day.

If you are telling me that Judaism and Christianity have been extremely counterproductive to human progress in certain eras, I agree. I still disagree fundamentally that you can compare Islam (most mainstream modern denominations) with these religions adequately, and what's more, I think that this sort of inadequate comparison is far too frequently made even by educated people and that it's very sadly diminishing the real impact of "true" Islam - the modern forms of Islam are as intolerant as the religion has ever been.

There are moderate Muslims, but there is no moderate Islam. It will always be incredibly easy to "radicalize" Muslims because the man they are supposed to emulate was a bloody warlord.

There are no clean hands here, and I, for one, would like to see more contact and discussion among and between the Abrahamic faiths. We have very, very much in common, in terms of values and ethics, than we have in opposition, and THERE lies the hope for reconciliation, coexistence, peace, justice, human rights, and allthatgoodstuff.

Again, I disagree. I do not think that Muslims would agree with many of modern Jewish or Christian ideals, values and ethics, and significant proportions of Muslims worldwide agree with death for apostates and homosexuals, restricting freedom of speech, torturing human beings etc. based on their belief in widely accepted Islamic texts and rulings.

Call me a Pollyanna, but I watched the movie the other day, and Pollyanna was right. If we look for the good in people, will will find it; if we look for evil, we will find that too.

I do not look for good or evil, but judge what is presented to me. I see fundamental backwardness and intolerance in their religion - a powerful and addictive, well-constructed meme which spreads to various extents to many more of the Muslims than any of us would like to admit. I've been discussing with Muslims online and in real life for years: many of them can be made to admit things that you wouldn't believe. You just need to phrase the questions properly so there is no room for escape.

They cannot and will not condemn anything which they *think* their prophet has done or their god has ordered.

I have many friends who are Muslims who pray and do Ramadan etc.
They are exquisite, intelligent, friendly people.
Still, they think that I am going to be tortured eternally by an ultimate dispenser of justice - so this torture is absolutely and objectively justified.

Do you even...? That's completely insane and delusional.

-Woland

[Woland]

If you want an ironic example of what I mean, the poster named Murad distances himself from "extremists", and many westerners would simply take him at his word and classify him as a moderate, while he supports:

-death penalty for apostates in Islamic countries
-the existence in Islam of circumstances where a man may beat his wife
-unequal treatment of Muslims and non-Muslims in front of the law
-stoning people for consensual sex (a most brutal form of mob-frenzy murder)
-whipping people for the same

I haven't asked him if he supports the death penalty for homosexuals based on his beliefs in Islam.

Murad, do you support the killing of homosexuals in Islamic countries based on your belief in Islam?

If so, how do you justify it?
If not, what should we say to the Muslims who do believe it is justified based on their belief in Islam so that their murderous tendencies will be cooled down?

-Woland

[cnorman18]

Hello cnorman18,

....

-Woland

I understand your point of view and respect it, but I do not share it. I suppose the few Muslims I have known may have been atypical, but I prefer to think not. It would appear that there are non-fundamentalist Muslims around who don't swallow the whole camel, so to speak, and it seems to me those are the Muslims we should support and encourage, as opposed to dumping on the faith as a whole. I could be wrong, but I'm just more inclined to try to find common ground than to throw rocks. Even if there is, in the final analysis, no common ground, and even if the rocks are wholly justifiable, I'd rather try to find hope than look for a reason to abandon it.

I respect your opinion, as I say, but I don't really see that there's a lot of hope for change if one takes that approach. Islam is not going to be stamped out anytime soon; hoping for an Islamic Reformation might be more in order than simply condemning the whole -- and continuing to crap on a guy who did, after all, live many centuries ago in a different world and a different culture, even if he did deserve all the criticism we heap on him.

We can't change the past. Maybe we should be trying to change the future. Are there NO Muslims who might lead the rest in a positive direction? Is there NO hope? If there is, let's look there. If there isn't -- let's make some.

[Murad]

Most people already know about nine-year-old Aisha, and about Mohammad's practice of deceit,

You seem to care for our beloved Aisha and seem concerned about her well-being in the hand of the Prophet. No need to be concerned, she lived a happy life(read her hadiths) and was the Prophets favourite wife.
Aisha was "9" when she married our Prophet. If this is weird or unacceptable to you, then are both her parents and the whole Arabs' culture back then also guilty for giving her and others like her in marriage to other men, 1500 years ago?

It is important to know that girls during the Biblical and Islamic days used to be married off at young ages when they either had their first periods, or their breasts start showing off. In other words, when they turn into "women", then they get married off. It was quite different for men on the other hand, because physical power and the ability of living an independent life had always been and will always be a mandatory requirement for men to have in life. So men waited much longer than women in terms of getting married. The guy had to develop both his body and mind before he was ready for marriage.

That is why you see girls as young as 9 or 10 were married to men as old as 30 or even older. The culture back then and in many third world countries today (non muslims too) is quite different than what you live in today.

Joseph, Mary's husband, was "90 years old" when he married 12 to 14-year old Mary.... Was he too a pedophile?

Right now, however, I am wondering why Mohammad included that passage in the Qur'an where he chides his wives for having expressed their displeasure with his breaking his promise to them that he would not marry a particular slave girl. In effect, he tells them to shut up or he'll replace them with better wives. Do Muslims believe that Mohammad sets a good example here of how one's wives should be treated?

You must understand, unlike Christianity, we dont elevate our prophets to become 'Gods' or 'God incarnates'. Muhammad was a man, a mortal, a slave of God. There are numerous hadiths that tell us the prophet argued with his wives or disagree'd with one another like the rest of us do, but they always reconciled.

This doesn't seem true as far as I can tell. What evidence do you have that Islamic extremism is dying out? And what is "the media" doing that somehow "creates" these Islamic extremists?

Islamic sects within Iraq and Lebanon are slowly accepting each others differences. Seems insignificant but in due time this will have a positive impact.
Hopefully other nations will follow and come to a self-realization.

What is the media doing? I hope thats a rhetorical question. The 'Burn a Quran Day' was not aired in numerous Islamic Countries with the fear that it will incite violent protests and create even more hate for the west. The media is the source of hate.
In the Islamic countries, the media is being used to create hate for the westerners.
In the western countries, the media is being used to create hate for the muslims.
Im sure you agree with me on this?

Murad, do you support the killing of homosexuals in Islamic countries based on your belief in Islam?

If so, how do you justify it?
If not, what should we say to the Muslims who do believe it is justified based on their belief in Islam so that their murderous tendencies will be cooled down?

-Woland

I personally do not support it, but under religious law from what i understand, homosexuality can result in capital punishment.
I dont support any capital punishment except for espionage and treason, and i base these on my subjective thoughts.

It really depends on the governance of the country and how they "interpret" or decide which Islamic text has authority. Take Indonesia for example, even though it has the largest concentration of muslims in the world, homosexuality is completetly legal. And then compare that with afghanistan or saudi arabia, where homosexuality can get you killed. There is a big difference yet both states are Islamic.
I would like to emphasize once again that perfect sharia(religious law) can only be achieved by the Khilafah.

[Pazuzu bin Hanbi]

The problem as I see it, and which royally pissed me off when I was of the faith and still irks me even now, is that non–muslims won’t let muslims reform! Especially Christians. I used to encounter it all the time. When people distance themselves from the extreme naysayers, mostly of the Christian variety if I go by online responses, say to them: “But that’s not TRUE Isl�m.�

So what? Jews have whole–heartedly abandoned cruel practices within Tanakh, such as stoning people to death, etc. Why not let muslims do the same with Isl�m? So what if it ends up an Isl�m different to that enacted by Muhammad? Isn’t that a good thing?

(Also, due to circumstances prevalent in the deserts, I would liken it more to David’s time for brutality and suchlike.)

[good]

My opinion in a nutshell. Please feel free to ask for clarifications or comment.

Islam, in many of its mainstream formats, is a currently popular ideology which is based on the teachings of a cunning, greedy and possibly delusional desert-dweller who died ages ago, yet which still quite succesfully promotes and achieves, in many (but thankfully not all by a long shot as people of all religions learn to discard, ignore or rationalize distasteful elements of their faiths which others including mainstream scholars have no problem with) of its followers and based on the writings in religious texts considered authoritative (mostly Quran and Sahih Hadith):

-intolerance (of homosexuals, apostates, polytheists, atheists, unmarried lovers, etc.), supremacism and bigotry
-war, totalitarianism, and perpetual societal conflict justified by a feeling of divine entitlement (observable in any Western country where Muslims are an even remotely

significant minority)
-violation of human rights such as equality of all humans and freedom of speech and religion (observable in nearly all Muslim-majority countries)
-ignorance (belief in djinns and all sorts of other unsurprisingly unevidenced "supernatural phenomena")

It contains many elements which, in my view, are quite efficient in making it naturally near irresistible to certain human beings - especially the emotionally weak, gullible, uneducated, and young ones:

-unverifiable and infinitely repeated threats of eternal torture in case of non-compliance
-unverifiable promises of eternal pleasures for the faithful
-apostates are threatened with death in many mainstream forms of Islam, and have to remain silent about their knowledge that Islam could not reasonably be assumed, especially with such an abysmal lack of evidence for its endless claims, to come from "the also unevidenced, conscious and intelligent maker of everything"
-unverifiable, unevidenced and simplistic explanations for the origin of our reality

It's not much more than a very efficient (at spreading and controlling thoughts) meme - like all the other religions making unevidenced claims who also have innumerable "quite convinced" adherents.

-Woland

Muhammad in the Bible of your tags if you believe you must believe in Muhammad and the Islamic religion