Author Topic: do the muslims on this board...  (Read 1743 times)

Shallow

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 7278
  • Karma: 215
  • I never had a digital pic of myself before
Re: do the muslims on this board...
« Reply #60 on: April 14, 2006, 06:04:08 PM »


i believe we are in agreement.  i'm certain that there are people who know these answers; and i am also certain that it is possible to find the answers to life's greatest question if one seeks in the right sources.  the key is that this sort of realization happens at the individual level and is something that cannot be told or directed.  the knowledge that you speak of is not some sort of intellectual concept to be understood, but a state of mind, a state of understanding to be realized. 
in many ways various religions have tried to capture both the descriptions of these realizations; and also direction to finding and verifying these answers on one's own. 



Many wise people who have dedicated their lives to finding these answers have come to different solutions. That right there tells me that we can't truly figure it out. I've always hada theory that God purposely put people on earth with different beliefs and that no matter what religion, if any, you can logically conclude what you should or shouldn't do in every situation. There are some that tricky like if someone is about to shoot you and you have a gun should you try and shoot him first to save yourself or let him kill you since you havea devout belief in the afterlife? Would it be suicide since you are letting yourself die, or sacrifice since you are sure you are getting to heaven but not sure if your attacker will and you want to give him a chance to repent and redeem himself?. Our human instinct would tell us to shoot back but if we absolutely knew for certain that we would be in paradise we'd probably let him shoot.   For the most part though the answers aren't as hard to figure out.

the bible does not claim that god is a man with semen.  the bible clearly states that mary knew no man.  the debate over whether or not jesus is god's son is largely a semantic debate over the usage of the word "son".  neither the bible nor the quran suggest that mary was impregnated by a man.  there is no debate in the qu'ran and bible as to the nature of the conception of jesus.  it's a semantic argument over the usage of words.

"many people have interpretted the relationship of jesus and god, and jesus words in a far different manner.  you portray this as an all or nothing issue when it's not."

I know what the Bible claims. I'm just saying if God can do anything then he should be able to become anything, and if he wanted to becaome a man with semen I don't see how he couldn't. I'm not saying that he has. I'm just saying he could.


and the Gospel of John is very clear about the origin of what became Jesus, and it's pretty much the essence of Christianity to believe that God was not pleased with the way his chosen prophets interpreted his word so he more or less sent his word down in the flesh, which meant he sent himself down so that we get it right. That's the belief anyway.


the one idea that i want to convey here is that the qu'ran and the bible do not disagree to the nature of jesus at all.  the qu'ran also refers to jesus as "the word of god":

sura 4:171
O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of God aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of God, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in God and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for God is one God: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs.


the only disagreement that exists  is the notion that jesus is equal to god and should also be worshipped.  the notion of the trinity.  the qu'ran completely supports the divine nature of jesus in all ways.
when people suggest that the interpretation of christ in the qu'ran is radically different from ideas held by some christians...this is wrong, and not bore out by studying the text to the quran.

I never thought or implied that the Quran dismiss Jesus or disagrees with most of what Jesus is/was. I just don't see such a huge problem with the trinity. It could mean anything really, but as of now I see it as; Dan is Dan. Dan is also the house painter who lives down the street. And Dan is also the father of Nick. So what is Dan? Is he the house painter or Nick's dad? He's both, and he's Dan. I know this is a lot simpler than saying God is God and he is God's son, so how can the son be the father. You can't father yourself. I get it. But you also can't split a sea in two so people can walk through it or send angels from the sky to earth, but God can, so maybe he can be the father and the son. I just don't question it since if I question tat I may as well question everything else God supposedly did.


this is the root of our current disagreement.  the old testament, the qu'ran...etc.  there is this idea that god's prophets, and religions in general often tell people what they need to hear for their circumstance.  the qu'ran directly has this idea of different people getting prophets and messengers at different times depending on their circumstances...if you look at the history of how the qu'ran was revealed (which was in stages over time) one theme has been that various suras were revealed to the prophet muhammad to address and resolve issues and concerns that were going on at the time.  there are verses in sura's that deal directly with people interacting with the prophet and his wives...etc.   this is why the qu'ran does not consider it an inconsistency that the various prophets throughout history have said different things.  it isn't an issue of god changing his mind; this is not the nature of god.  it is an issue of prophets providing divinely inspired guidance to the people.


So Muhammad said to do that while he was under the influence of God? I thought the Quran was the direct word of God and not Muhammad, and that Muhammad had his own teachings in another book.

the basic idea that i think you are missing is this.  the qu'ran isn't about dictating the terms of your marriage; however the qu'ran does provide guidance about the structure of marriages at that time, and that advice is still heeded today.

in modern times; when marriages are not arranged by parents, the matter in which you structure your marriage would be less influenced by that guidance and more dictated by your own wishes; so it's a moot issue.


So then why wouldn't the Quran state that this is a "for the times" suggestion? Or does it? And if it doesn't identify which is for the times and which isn't then who is to say what is timeless and what isn't. I know people that still live with a very sexist mindest (Muslim and Christian). Blatant hypocrites who would beat up there sister's or future daughters for having sex but have no problem deflowering young sisters and daughters of other men. I guess I don't like it when people like that can look to spiritual scripts and interpret justfication for their actions. When a Christian takes various quotes from Paul and point out something that makes it okay for them to act that way, I just say show me where Jesus said it was okay and I'll leave you alone. They usually ignmore me for a while and hope I forget. (I have a lot of loser friends).

you've suggested that muslims believe in "the sort of god" that wishes to see women dominated and subservient.

god does not wish in this sort of whimsical manner.   what the qu'ran states is that god wishes for his creations to be loving towards each other and to worship him.

I never said that they should be dominated or hurt. I just said that they should be seen as 100% equal. Anything a man is allowed to do according to God, a woman should be given that same permission.




what i am challenging is your suggestion of the qu'ran's portrayal of god, when across the muslim world's there are numerous examples of the nature of god being appreciated in a vastly different manner than what you suggest.

i heard a sufi shaykh speak and he characterized the judiasm/christianity/islam relationship thusly:
abraham/moses were about living by the law
jesus was about looking towards the afterlife
muhammad was about balancing the preparation for the spiritual afterlife with appreciating the physical world and existence as well.




I don't doubt that there are many muslims, maybe even most musims, that don't follow anything immoral. I guess I see it as with Islam a person has to almost rise above some of the things Muhammad did or said to be as righteous as they can be, where in Christianity a person can't even come close to being as righteous as Jesus. For this I cannot call Jesus and Muhammad equals and have to see Jesus as superior.

P.S. When I say rise above, I mean see a verse like Sura 4:34 where it says you should scourge or admonish a wife that rebels and say; no I'd rather treat my wife as an equal instead of leading her, since I am no better than her, and since I don't want to raise my daughters to be less than ther future husbands as far as raising the family goes. I didn't mean you have to become a better person than Muhammad was.
 

nibs

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1191
  • Karma: 1
  • aco forever
Re: do the muslims on this board...
« Reply #61 on: April 15, 2006, 10:03:57 AM »
Many wise people who have dedicated their lives to finding these answers have come to different solutions. That right there tells me that we can't truly figure it out.

i think that there are many valid solutions to life's questions, some different and some contrasting.  life is what you make it, religion is what you make it as well.

Quote
I've always hada theory that God purposely put people on earth with different beliefs and that no matter what religion, if any, you can logically conclude what you should or shouldn't do in every situation.
 There are some that tricky like if someone is about to shoot you and you have a gun should you try and shoot him first to save yourself or let him kill you since you havea devout belief in the afterlife? Would it be suicide since you are letting yourself die, or sacrifice since you are sure you are getting to heaven but not sure if your attacker will and you want to give him a chance to repent and redeem himself?. Our human instinct would tell us to shoot back but if we absolutely knew for certain that we would be in paradise we'd probably let him shoot.   For the most part though the answers aren't as hard to figure out.

i think the right thing to do is the decision that is made that is selfless.  decisions that are made out of selfishness and malice are what is wrong.

sometimes people will make horrifically destructive decisions with the purest of intentions.  possibly because of ignorance, possibly because they are misguided.  the ultimate reward requires both wisdom and pure intentions.

there is an interesting hindu parable that suggests that the best thing to do in your murder suicide scenario would be to shoot and kill your assailaint in order to prevent him from injuring his soul by incurring negative karma from assaulting you in malice.   hinduism has the belief that the soul is eternal, the physical body is a false identity, and while life is precious and suffering is only imagined; it is impossible to actually harm another person's true self in this physical realm.  so it all works out.

there are alot of varying ideas on how to address those sorts of situations. 

Quote
and the Gospel of John is very clear about the origin of what became Jesus, and it's pretty much the essence of Christianity to believe that God was not pleased with the way his chosen prophets interpreted his word so he more or less sent his word down in the flesh, which meant he sent himself down so that we get it right. That's the belief anyway.

and the qu'ran supports that belief. 
the reason for the prophet muhammad was in no way a slight against jesus; but instead the qu'ran states that the purpose is to further clarify what some jesus followers have gotten wrong.  i just want to emphasize that the qu'ran is in no way an assault on christ's teachings.  rather, it's stated purpose is to clarify misconceptions about those teachings as well as the old prophets.

more interestingly, in several verses the qu'ran suggests that christians and jews will also attain heavenly reward, even without accepting the qu'ran. 

sura 2:62
Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.


Quote
So Muhammad said to do that while he was under the influence of God? I thought the Quran was the direct word of God and not Muhammad, and that Muhammad had his own teachings in another book.

it is the direct word of god to the prophet muhammad.  i did not mean to suggest otherwise.  the context with which the qu'ran should be appreciated is subject to debate and also varies.  i tend to agree with the argument that god tells people what they need to know.  this idea is supported within the qu'ran as not only did various communities get different warners with different messages, but some of the teachings of the various prophets vary slightly.  the purpose for religion is not to create robots out of people but to create a level of understanding; thus the notion that the answers would change slightly within context is not disturbing.

Quote
So then why wouldn't the Quran state that this is a "for the times" suggestion? Or does it? And if it doesn't identify which is for the times and which isn't then who is to say what is timeless and what isn't.

the qu'ran does not apply expiration dates to it's advice. 
the qu'ran does identify which ideas are the most important; and which ideas are for advice.  the core ideas are absolute, the qu'ran defines directly what islam is: submission the the will of god;  leading a righteous life, observing the contact prayers, charity towards to poor...etc.  it also provides general advice and guidance for life and life's affairs, and typically contains the rationalization for that guidance.  in order to interpret a verse then, one can focus on the rationalization to appreciate the spirit of the law.

for example:
sura 2:62 (snippet)
any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.


sura 2:112
Nay,-whoever submits His whole self to God and is a doer of good,- He will get his reward with his Lord; on such shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.


those are very specific and absolute.

in contrast:
sura 33:32
O Consorts of the Prophet! Ye are not like any of the (other) women: if ye do fear (God), be not too complacent of speech, lest one in whose heart is a disease should be moved with desire: but speak ye a speech (that is) just.

sura 33:59
O Prophet ! tell thy wives and thy daughters, and the women of the believers, that they should pull down upon them of their outer cloaks from their heads over their faces. That is more likely that they may thus be recognized and not molested. And ALLAH is Most Forgiving, Merciful.


while this is god's word, it is advice to the wives of the prophet specifically; the second verse also applies to female muslims.  this advice is provided to address and prevent undesirable behavior in others; it does not indicate that god cares or desires women to cover up for their spirituality; but it is advice for the women conducting themselves among others. 

when the context of how to interpret the qu'ran is debated, the ideas  in the qu'ran that are absolute and timeless are clear.  there is one god, do not worship idols...etc.  other ideas that are inherently contextual have been interpretted in different ways across muslim communities.  some prefer literal interpretations; some favor adhering to the spirit of the advice;  thus you have many muslim not wearing a burqa or hijab but still dressing modestly.
 
Quote
I guess I see it as with Islam a person has to almost rise above some of the things Muhammad did or said to be as righteous as they can be

i think it depends on how you interpret what the prophet muhammad said and what the qu'ran says.  i haven't studied the hadiths, but i am familiar with how people have misinterpretted some of the teachings of the prophet muhammad.

i don't look at the qu'ran as a set of rules but as instruction to developing a more righteous mindset.

Quote
in Christianity a person can't even come close to being as righteous as Jesus. For this I cannot call Jesus and Muhammad equals and have to see Jesus as superior.

in islam one would worship god and neither the prophet jesus nor the prophet muhammad; so it isn't a big issue. 

Quote
P.S. When I say rise above, I mean see a verse like Sura 4:34 where it says you should scourge or admonish a wife that rebels and say; no I'd rather treat my wife as an equal instead of leading her, since I am no better than her, and since I don't want to raise my daughters to be less than ther future husbands as far as raising the family goes.

i understand why you would have issues with sura 4:34 to the letter of the law.

sura 4:34
Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because God has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what God would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For God is Most High, great (above you all).


beating is the last resort.  it states that the rationale is that the man provides for the woman; which may or may not be true today as women are better able to provide for themselves.  additionally, the woman here is charged with disloyalty.  much of sura 2 and 4 are dedicated to establishing the rights of women as well as the fair treatment in general; and also specifically for women after divorce where the husband must continue to take care of them and allow them to remain in their homes.  4:34 is an attempt to preserve the balance so that a wife could not force a divorce yet still be taken care of.  this is largely an issue of fairness.  the reason that i don't have a problem with this is i don't see it as advocating domination but advocating a measure of balance and fairness when taken within the qu'ran as a whole. 

we can look at jesus, he performed miracles for his times, but he did not perform miracles for the future.  jesus could have revealed some amount of specific scientific information that could only be appreciated and understood in the future times.   yet he did not.  his miracles were contextual.
the qu'ran could have been a message directed towards future more liberal societies but then you have to question how those ideas would have been accepted at that time.

surely there is the danger of an individual trying to exploit the letter of the law, but again; religion isn't about some sort of strict legal adherence to the letter of the law.  it's about what is in an individuals heart and what motivates them.  and this is born out in the qu'ran.

sura 2:8-12
Of the people there are some who say: "We believe in God and the Last Day;" but they do not (really) believe.
Fain would they deceive Allah and those who believe, but they only deceive themselves, and realise (it) not!
In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: And grievous is the penalty they (incur), because they are false (to themselves).
When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!"
Of a surety, they are the ones who make mischief, but they realise (it) not.


the qu'ran as a whole paints a different picture than individual selected verses. 
« Last Edit: April 15, 2006, 10:06:24 AM by nibs »
"a four letter word is going out to every single enemy" - kam
 

WestCoasta

  • Guest
Re: do the muslims on this board...
« Reply #62 on: April 15, 2006, 05:42:18 PM »
religious people need to smoke some bud to relax
 

coola

  • Guest
Re: do the muslims on this board...
« Reply #63 on: April 16, 2006, 08:30:45 AM »
religious people need to smoke some bud to relax
LMAO
preeeeeach !!! i'm off to roll one up  8)