Lying for Islam

[McCulloch]

Lying for Islam.

In recent debates, deliberate falsehoods have been presented by proponents of Islam. Now, I am willing to admit that the debater here may not have been trying to deceive us, but simply passing on what he thought was correct information while neglecting to even perform a simple check of the facts. So the responsibility for the deception may be in his sources. The source cited was Kavkaz-Center on materials of Islamic internet MASS MEDIA. According to Answering Islam, this hoax has been disseminated (and continues to be) by Waqf Ikhlas, Istanbul and Al-Furqan-Ta-Ha.

Jacques Cousteau, Will Smith, Neil Armstrong, Michael Jackson, Maurice Bucaille, King Offa of Mercia, Abdu'l-Ahad Dawud (Professor David Benjamin Keldani), who Muslims falsely claim was a former Catholic Bishop and The Coptic Cardinal Abu Ishaq have all been subject to false claims of conversion to Islam.

I will admit my ignorance about many of the teachings of Islam. I know that Judaism, Christianity and Humanism all claim to value the importance of intellectual honesty.

The question for debate is, does Islam allow, encourage or tolerate lying and fabrication for the benefit of Islam?

[Truth_Teller]

I´m not here to advocate any scholars. I have already stated that those saying of Muhammad have been falsely attributed to him. And I can prove that. If we were only to follow what the scholars say then my advice would be that such Forums and debate places should be banned.

[Rathpig]

If we were only to follow what the scholars say then my advice would be that such Forums and debate places should be banned.

Banning information and debate is never an answer to anything.


Anyway, we are discussing Islamic scholarship that goes back to a period contemporary with Mohammad and has been consistent in the Dar al-Islam. It can't be called "false" unless you are willing to judge the very basis of 1400 years of Islam.

Changing this now seems more a case of lying to protect the reputation of Islam than an actual opposition to the practice.

[Truth_Teller]

It is also a fact that there is a split in opinions of scholars as well on this issue. You can continue banging your head. I know that there´s no punishment for apostasy and it´s a fact.

[Goat]

It is also a fact that there is a split in opinions of scholars as well on this issue. You can continue banging your head. I know that there´s no punishment for apostasy and it´s a fact.

Perhaps from a scholarly point of view, but from a practical point of view, I think someone who leaves Islam would be in a very precarious situation in many parts of the world.

[Rathpig]

Islam, like Christianity, is a political endeavor hidden behind a religious superstition. The ambiguity of the superstition allows lies, deceptions, and the judicious use of violent force to compel adherence. An ethereal "supernatural" punishment compounds the myriad Earthly punishments to combined into an effective form of totalitarianism.

Abrahamic religion is a form of malevolent government and should be treated as such. Islam specifically is a hate group and should be treated as such.

As has been demonstrated, Muslims will readily lie and equivocate to bolster their political agenda.

It is time the world moved on. Respect for ignorance and superstition is horribly misplaced.

[Goat]

Islam, like Christianity, is a political endeavor hidden behind a religious superstition. The ambiguity of the superstition allows lies, deceptions, and the judicious use of violent force to compel adherence. An ethereal "supernatural" punishment compounds the myriad Earthly punishments to combined into an effective form of totalitarianism.

Abrahamic religion is a form of malevolent government and should be treated as such. Islam specifically is a hate group and should be treated as such.

As has been demonstrated, Muslims will readily lie and equivocate to bolster their political agenda.

It is time the world moved on. Respect for ignorance and superstition is horribly misplaced.

While much of Islam, particularly as it is practiced in the Arab world, and in some third world countries, met your description, that is not universal. I think you are painting with too broad a brush.

[Rathpig]

While much of Islam, particularly as it is practiced in the Arab world, and in some third world countries, met your description, that is not universal. I think you are painting with too broad a brush.

I would have once taken a more nuanced position, but I have since accepted an explanatory theory proposed by Sam Harris in The End of Faith. "Moderate" religious adaptations are every much as malevolent as the most extreme version of the ideology because it is these "moderate" versions which allow the extremism a cloak of legitimacy. In fact these moderate versions almost never act as a force to lessen extremism but extremism frequently acts as a force to radicalize the moderate interpretations.

This is exactly what has happened to Islam in the twentieth century. Abrahamic religion is first and foremost a political expression. When Islam had eased into merely a cultural role with little overt effect on politics, it was a rather benign ideology. In some parts of the Western world this is true today. (Much like cultural Christianity.) However, anyone who truly believes the mythology of Islam is a potential political operative given motivation. This is why "moderate" is a somewhat specious term. A "moderate" Muslim is best described as one who is not an extremist even though they remain a political operative and offer ideological legitimacy to the extreme views. Saying "different interpretations" isn't doing anything about the underlying malevolence.

That is not a very useful definition because it defines in the negative. We could say a "moderate" Muslim is one that has "yet to blow themselves up".


This is why "moderate" religious adherents are not really an improvement over their extremist counterparts. The definition is fluid, yet the use of the word "moderate" serves as political cover from criticism of the entire ideology. The problem is Islam. The problem is Islam, and Abrahamism, as an ideology.

Saying a specific group doesn't accept certain offensive parts of an overall offensive ideology doesn't make them "moderate" in concrete terms.

[Pazuzu bin Hanbi]

I agree with you to a degree. I recall feeling embarrassed about things like the rule allowing men to hit women, the discrepancies between what people say Islam preached and what actually occurred in reality, bizarre stories like the ascension of Muhammad into heaven and back, etc. I spoke to scholars, imams, researched in books and online, encountered multiple different viewpoints, but never received satisfactory answers.

I considered myself a moderate, and wanted to modernise and reform Islam. I wanted people to concentrate on the good points of Islam, contextualise the bad to explain it away as a freak occurrence at that time, and apply the good rules to modern life.

Then I realised that the problem didn’t lay in my interpretation of Islam, but in Islam itself! Like everything else in life, it has evolved beyond its roots and changed radically to accommodate new things it encountered. But it has kept its age–old mentality. And with the dogma that it represents the ACTUAL word of god (instead of jews, for example, who say that god inspired the Bible), it can never change — for to change means blasphemy against god.

I no longer take any interest in ‘modernising’ Islam. If you can change it so radically, if it contains so much room for interpretation that fundamentalist zealots who murder others can stake a legitimate claim to the religion alongside more contemporary–minded ‘moderates’, then that religion is not clear–cut and (ultimately) a flawed one. It cannot have come from a divine source. It is manmade, a response to the times and social and political factors of the time period which created it. It is best confined to those times.

[Rathpig]

It is best confined to those times.

This is ultimately the best approach. Because of the Bid'a concept and the political nature of Islam, any "reform" that would be meaningful will have to overcome those who profit from the religion remaining the same. Those are many.

Christianity is similar in many ways, and would have best been left in history. It is hard to comprehend that hundreds of years after the Enlightenment we continue, especially in the U.S. and the Catholic-dominated regions of the world, to have an anachronistic superstition with powerful political and cultural influence. So many people profit in both power and money that this is a difficult situation to change.

[hado]

Lying for Islam.

In recent debates, deliberate falsehoods have been presented by proponents of Islam. Now, I am willing to admit that the debater here may not have been trying to deceive us, but simply passing on what he thought was correct information while neglecting to even perform a simple check of the facts. So the responsibility for the deception may be in his sources. The source cited was Kavkaz-Center on materials of Islamic internet MASS MEDIA. According to Answering Islam, this hoax has been disseminated (and continues to be) by Waqf Ikhlas, Istanbul and Al-Furqan-Ta-Ha.

Jacques Cousteau, Will Smith, Neil Armstrong, Michael Jackson, Maurice Bucaille, King Offa of Mercia, Abdu'l-Ahad Dawud (Professor David Benjamin Keldani), who Muslims falsely claim was a former Catholic Bishop and The Coptic Cardinal Abu Ishaq have all been subject to false claims of conversion to Islam.

I will admit my ignorance about many of the teachings of Islam. I know that Judaism, Christianity and Humanism all claim to value the importance of intellectual honesty.

The question for debate is, does Islam allow, encourage or tolerate lying and fabrication for the benefit of Islam?

Lying in Islam is Haram
in other world Muslim faith is open we have no secrets to hide you can go to any Islamic ebooks website and download whatever you want..
God says {وَق�ل� الْحَقّ� م�ن رَّبّ�ك�مْ �َمَن شَاء �َلْي�ؤْم�ن وَمَن شَاء �َلْيَكْ��رْ إ�نَّا أَعْتَدْنَا ل�لظَّال�م�ينَ نَاراً أَحَاطَ ب�ه�مْ س�رَاد�ق�هَا وَإ�ن يَسْتَغ�يث�وا ي�غَاث�وا ب�مَاء كَالْم�هْل� يَشْو�ي الْو�ج�وهَ ب�ئْسَ الشَّرَاب� وَسَاءتْ م�رْتَ�َقاً }الكه�29
Sura Cave :Kahef Verse 29
and this verse mean say the the truth is from Lord and who will to believe he believe and who will not then not(translated by me please back to authorized translation for more understanding..)
so Allah give us free will to select to believe in Him and His Verses or reject Him so why we have to lie for Islam ?!
that is the main idea
BUT
many Muslims try to convience None Muslims about Islam using lying ! this type of people like to save you with all means I believe that foolish but still put your self in their position ! they believe that they hold the truth and they want you to become Muslim so you can go to Paradise and Muslims believes that we human are all brothers and sisters from Adam and eve...so it`s their duty to help you we call this Dawah
so some Muslims yes they may try to lie nobody says that all Muslims are really knowledgable about Islam!
anyway prophet mohammed allow /discourage this 3 type of lying:
1- lie to your enemy :
if a Muslim is in war and an enemy catch him it`s allowed to lie on this person
2- lie to your wife :
in order to have happy life with your wife you have to beatuify your words and may be some words you use is falasy but still for sake of family unity you can do that
3- lie for sake of Islaah :
if there are 2 people/groups who are on fight with each others it`s allow to beautify your words and reinterptate things in positive way in order to fix this situation and stop the fight .. like when my friends fight with each other I catch one of them and told him something like man you may misunderstand him may be he he angrey with something else and so one
in the end I want to remind you with famous hadith which says"
الصدق منجاة
indeed telling the truth is salavation for you
with best regards
and peace be with you..