I have a few questions about Islam

[imitator]

Part of that lies in the need of others to prove to themselves that their faith is the correct one.

If you have faith, and it enhances your life, be happy with that. If other people dont share it, or find their happiness in something else, then so what? There is no need for anyone to force upon others their beliefs and faith systems, its foolish, and the cause of all the problems we see with religion/faith.

[imitator]

Part of that lies in the need of others to prove to themselves that their faith is the correct one.

If you have faith, and it enhances your life, be happy with that. If other people dont share it, or find their happiness in something else, then so what? There is no need for anyone to force upon others their beliefs and faith systems, its foolish, and the cause of all the problems we see with religion/faith.

Thats not to imply that all do this, by far that would be false.

But then again, its never the moderate people that are noticed throughout life in everything, its the extremists.

And no matter what the subject, no matter when or where, problems are caused when you introduce extremism into the equation.

[asadkahloon]

asadkaloon:



That's makes no sense considering the muslim empires. They obviously found some scripture in the koran that told them to go out and conquer the infedels and kill anyone who resisted. It widely known that the koran teaches muslims to conquer the world. And I don't believe for a moment that they never slughtered women and children.

Not to mention the justification I remember the koran saying this, that it was every mans duty to kill an infedel and that Christians should have thier heads cut off. I'm pretty cetain about that, and that it never mentioned having to have been provoked.

For them to conquer the world and put everyone under shariah law it requires them to be the aggressors.

Just because you see history being misinterpreted and showing all of the Muslim empires to be agresdively killing Christians, that is not all true. There were many instances when Christians lived in harmony among the Muslim rulers but were required to pay a mandatory tax if they choose not to convert to Islam.

[asadkahloon]

I would agree that there are some roles men cannot do that women can (bearing children being the obvious). But the reverse isn't really true -- there are very few roles women cannot perform as well as men, with the exception, in some cases, of heavy lifting type gruntwork. (Although there are some very strong women, just as there are some physically weak men.) In other words, once the child's born and no longer breast feeding, there's no rational reason the woman can't go out and be the bread-winner while the man stays home with the kids, other than the fact that this particular religion doesn't agree with that scenario. That *is* sexist.

The only reason women need men is for their sperm, to create children, and scientists already figured out how to turn a stem cell from a *woman* into a sperm, so it won't be long before women don't even need us for that either. That doesn't work in reverse; even if we figure out how to create eggs from the stem cells of a male, we still don't have a uterus or birth canal. Women are very close to being sufficient unto themselves, and men are very close to being obsolete.

well there is nothing in the Quran that says that women cannot go out and work, and they are free to work if they choose to do so but if a women decides that they don't want to work then it is the guy's duty to provide for mer and make sure she doesn't go hungry. But working women don't have any obligation to support their men.

[rebgirl420]

^Like THATS any better. But to be fair, the muslims might kill in the name of god but so do every one of the other religions out there (with the exception of a few I guess). Look at the crusades for example! Christians killed thousands if not more b/c of religion.

You cant take a few stray people from a religion and make broad assumptions. But im sure we all here know that. Stoners have a way of having an "above the influence" look about religion.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

^Like THATS any better. But to be fair, the muslims might kill in the name of god but so do every one of the other religions out there (with the exception of a few I guess). Look at the crusades for example! Christians killed thousands if not more b/c of religion.

You cant take a few stray people from a religion and make broad assumptions. But im sure we all here know that. Stoners have a way of having an "above the influence" look about religion.

Rebgirl hit the mark. I'm sure there's plenty of Muslim's who have killed Christians, and vice versa. There's people from every religion killing one another. I was shocked to find out a couple years ago that some Buddhist temples have warred over differences in scriptural interpretations, full on killing, and the biggest aspect of Buddhism is supposed to be compassion for all life, whether it be friend, enemy, or a cockroach. What can I say, people are screwed up. That's why I'm not crazy about choosing sects. I follow the Buddha's teachings, but all I do is reach strait from his teachings and make the best possible sense of them for myself.


Also, I have to question the notion that Muslim's are supposed to kill Christians as commanded by the Koran. Muhammad did a lot of study in Europe of ancient Greek and Christian philosophers, and he took his teachings from the angel Gabriel who is a product of Christian theology. The whole reason Islam was created was because he believed that Christianity had been altered from it's original teachings, that Jesus wasn't a devine manifestation but was a messenger of god... and I gotta say I agree for the most part.

You know looking at all the western conflicts in the middle east, I wouldn't be surprised if Muslims believe Christians are under obligation to slaughter or convert non-believers. It's a shame a few assholes can taint the image of the whole.

EDIT: Oh and Ashadkaloon, you have my many thanks for all the help:thumbsup::jointsmile:

[couch-potato]

Read the Qu'ran (or Koran) and it evident that Muslims are very encouraged to make war with the unbelievers. They want world domination for Allah, and with the aspect of jihad imprinted into their skulls they tend to be fearless. Any moderates in that religion are simply ignoring a good chunk of scriptures.

[asadkahloon]

Read the Qu'ran (or Koran) and it evident that Muslims are very encouraged to make war with the unbelievers. They want world domination for Allah, and with the aspect of jihad imprinted into their skulls they tend to be fearless. Any moderates in that religion are simply ignoring a good chunk of scriptures.

Give me some evidence of where you see this. You're telling me millions of Muslims who don't dominate or kill simply don't understand the religion? I believe not.

[THClord]

IMO islam is not a bad religion at all, but the media and Hollywood tend to portray the islam as highly terroristic.
I think Bush has a lot do with this in trying to get the country to go to war. And there is some evidence that some of the terrorism in Iraq is fake and done by allied soldiers (watch Zeitgeist on google video if you want to know more).

So basically the media is shaping peoples' beliefs in any way it wants to.

[Oneironaut]

So I was just watching a program called "God's Warriors" on CNN, and the reporter referred to some followers of Islam as "Moslims", something I've heard many times before. So why is it that when referring to followers of Islam I hear the terms "Moslim", "Muslim", and "Islamic"? Is there a difference between the three?

A "Muslim" (can also be spelled/pronounced "Moslem") is a follower of the Islamic faith. A person cannot be an Islamic. "Islamic" is an adjective. You talk about Islamic culture, the Islamic calendar, Islamic scripture, etc. but you don't call people Islamics. That's bad grammar.

Also I was curious if anybody knows the Qur'an's official policy on Jihad, smiting infidels, who qualifies as an "infidel", and treatment of women. I once heard a quote from Muhammad that went "to kill one muslim is to kill us all", but it might have been "to kill one person is to kill us all", I can't remember.

Any knowledgeable religious scholars with some info?

There is no one official Muslim policy on these things. Just like Christianity, there are lots of different sects and sub-sects, with their own interpretations of what the scripture means. This is especially true of what "jihad" is supposed to mean. There is a lot of debate on that issue going on, but (according to Wikipedia), "although some Islamic scholars have differered on the implementation of Jihad, there is consensus amongst them that the concept of jihad will always include armed struggle against persecution and oppression".

As for women, there is no way to doubt that the Qur'an considers them inferior to men, and that this belief is widely practiced throughout Islamic culture. It's really quite an abomination. Here is a thorough collection of the anti-woman verses in the Qur'an, if you're interested, but this one really says it all:

"And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them in kindness, and men are a degree above them." â??Surah 2:228