PDA

View Full Version : athiest(Asad) vs closet athiest(Manji):Old but relevant to current sociocide theme



AAAhmed46
11th February 09, 07:57 PM
As’ad Abukhalil is an athiest and secular humanist, wrote books on arabian politics and the role of religion and politics in terrorism as well as many things. He has a clear dislike for all religion and promotes it's mockery, Like zam harris, but does not single out one religion. Unlike Sam Harris, he does not promote dropping g a nuclear weapon on the Muslim world. Your typical ex-muslim atheist who isn't from Iran most likely is alot like Asad. Asad is different in the fact that he's very well read in islam and islamic history, My english 101 professor was an ex-muslim, she said that "the quran says apostates are to be killed" I showed her versus on apostates and asked if she say any commanment to kill, then i told her she's actually talking about hadith, and that even then, talked about historical and translation circumstances as well as hadith that contradict it. She was totally unaware of it all, and she's a damn Phd while im an undergrad living with my parents. And she ACKNOWLEDGED the fact she never read the whole damn book(quran) and knew even less about hadith.

Most of you know who Irshad manji is. For those who don't know, she wrote a book called the trouble with Islam today, and the thesis of the book is that islam isn't evil but the culture in modern times is. She also agrued that mohammed was a feminist.

This is a debate they had on Democracy now.





AMY GOODMAN: As we host a debate on the controversy over the cartoons depicting Prophet Muhammed and the worldwide protest, we’re joined in the Yale studio in New Haven, Connecticut, by Irshad Manji. She is author of the book The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in her Faith, currently based at Yale as a Visiting Fellow with the International Security Studies program. And on the phone with us from California is As’ad AbuKhalil, professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus, author of several books. His latest is The Battle for Saudi Arabia: Royalty, Fundamentalism and Global Power. He also runs a popular blog called the Angry Arab News Service. And we welcome you both to Democracy Now! Can you respond to these worldwide protests against the publication of these cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed?

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Well, I will try to explain some of the orientations of Muslim Arab angers about the cartoons. Before I do so, I would like to say, right at the outset, where I stand. First, I’m very much in favor, and I relish the opportunity to mock every and other religion. What I think is very bothersome to many Arabs and Muslims is exactly what the other guest does, which is selective condemnation and mocking of one religion over others. I mean, I think if you mock all religion, that is consistent, free thinking, in support for the enlightenment, as well as secularism, but what comes out of many in the West is selective secularism, the notion that you can mock one religion, but all others have to be treated with reverence and sacredness. And this is why this entire defense, in the name of freedom of speech, doesn’t sell very much in the Arab world.

People very much know that offenses against Muslims and Arabs are often treated as defensive, and because they’re in the name of freedom of speech, and The Philadelphia Inquirer, which among other western publications circulated and reprinted those cartoons again in the name of freedom of speech, and we all know that they wouldn’t dare do so if these were offensive to Jews, for example. I mean, this entire debate of newsworthiness of those cartoons also is not very convincing. I mean, David Irving is a grotesque Nazi white supremacist so-called historian in England who was in trial, and I wouldn’t think that The Philadelphia Inquirer would ever dare reprint some of his ugly hateful writings about the Second World era. I mean, this shows exactly the kind of hypocrisy that is striking many in the Arab Muslim world. The second thing I want to say is, I mean—

AMY GOODMAN: Let me get Irshad Manji to respond, and then you can respond to her.

IRSHAD MANJI: Well, thank you very much, Amy. I am, frankly, shocked that your other guest would already attack me for being quote/unquote “selective.” Certainly I have written a book called The Trouble with Islam Today, but as I have pointed out time and again, that doesn’t mean that the other religions are problem-free. It’s just that there are no shortage of books in the libraries about the problem with Christianity, no dearth of books about the trouble with Judaism. It seems to me that we Muslims have a lot of catching up to do in the dissent department. And I think that a program like this very much appreciates the need for dissent of all belief systems.

And speaking of dissent, you know, I find it interesting that your other guest suggests or actually emphasizes that there is a targeting of Islam, but that no other religion, you know, can be mocked. How then does he explain the routinely and viciously anti-Semitic programming that comes out of the Arab world. And I would remind him that we Muslims never protest that kind of atrocity. So, how do we have integrity demanding to the rest of the world that they completely respect our religion, when we ourselves have trouble respecting other faiths?

AMY GOODMAN: As’ad AbuKhalil.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Well, Amy, that’s very easy to respond to. First of all, I am aware of the pontification of the other guest on FOX News, among other outlets that relish the opportunity to have somebody like her—

IRSHAD MANJI: I’ll let CNN know.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: One second. One second. This is not FOX—O’Reilly show. This is Amy Goodman. Let me speak. Who are very much in favor of having people who are very much uniquely focused only on Islam. I mean, as it happens, the other guest writes on Islam without being trained or knowledgeable about it. If she would, she would know that there are many brave souls, free thinkers on the history of Islam who spoke out, and some of them died because they went against conventional wisdom, and they were braver against Islam, the religion. Many of them mocked Muhammed. Many of them mocked the Koran. And some of them lived with their heads on their shoulder, but she is totally ignorant about that, because that’s not her specialty.

I mean, her specialty is polemics against Islam, and that’s something very much appreciated in the United States. Yes, it is true there are many media in the Arab world that have published grotesque anti-Semitic depictions and images. But these are the responsibility of the government, and many of them are allies of the United States. And she is also, again, ignorant—perhaps she doesn’t know any Persian or Arabic—to know that there’s a big debate and there’s a lot of condemnation about anti-Semitic writings that have come out in some of those publications.

But the issue here also is about something else. I mean, there is a notion in the West here that, you know, the issue is about the fact that Muslims ban depictions of the prophet, I mean, which is true even though in the history of Islamic art, if your guest knows anything about it, there are like tons of, you know, illustrations in Persia, among other places, where Muhammed was, in fact, in very clear detail depicted by Muslims at the time.

For many today in the Arab world, and, I mean, as far as a ranking of outrageous, this is not something that outrages me—that outrages me. But you cannot, in the name of the freedom of speech, deny the Muslims and Arabs the right to be outraged about something that offends them. But that’s the whole issue, that we believe that offenses to Muslims should be defended as something that is in the name of, you know, speech. And there are many outlets today that are reprinting those same cartoons that are offensive to Muslims in the name of freedom of speech, while people do not treat offenses to other religions in the same manner. And it seems to me, if you insist on people having the right to depict in any way they want all prophets, as I do—I mean, I would love to have mocking of all religions. But people don’t do that. People are very selective in what religion can be mocked and ridiculed by comedians and by cartoonists in many Western countries.

AMY GOODMAN: Irshad Manji, your response?

IRSHAD MANJI: It seems to me that our friend here believes that the more angry you are, the more right you are. Boy, I certainly don’t make that kind of an equation. And as far as, you know, reprinting and re-broadcasting these cartoons, I find it interesting that my favorite propaganda platform, according to your guest, FOX News, won’t even go there. They won’t rebroadcast these cartoons, and yet last night they were only too happy to trot out the viciously anti-Jewish cartoons that routinely appear in the Arab world. And you know why they believe they could get away with that? Because the Jews are not going to storm their offices. The Jews are not going to issue death threats against the journalists who are behind these cartoons. The Jews are not going to threaten the lives of people who carry American passports, whereas we Muslims, we do, you know, have trouble containing our own violence, and anybody—anybody who denies that is clearly living in the world of theory, not in the world of reality.

AMY GOODMAN: As’ad AbuKhalil, would you say this is an overreaction, what is happening?

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: I mean, first of all, Amy, it’s not up to me to decide. I have my own sensibilities, and for me, I mean, as a secular atheist, you know, I would love to have people who mock and ridicule all religions together, but it is the inconsistency that’s striking, as well as hypocrisy. I mean, she happens to mention the network when she is always pontificating about—about the issues of Islam, even though she is not trained in the subject whatsoever, is that FOX News have routinely talked about how there are offenses to Christianity because people don’t say “Merry Christmas” during the season. I mean, we cannot in any way deny that there are sensibilities of Jews and Christians right here in this country, and that’s something that’s very controversial. You cannot deny that. And when she talks about routine anti-Semitism, I mean, that is also a generalization about an entire region and about millions of people in the world. As I said, she is totally unaware about the many Muslims and Arabs who routinely speak out against anti-Semitism in the Arabic press, and these are governments that control the press, so we cannot say it’s the reflection of society in general.

IRSHAD MANJI: Where are the protests, my friend? Where are the protests? Where are the ordinary people pouring into the streets?

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: You don’t know about them. They don’t have to appear on O’Reilly for you to know about them. They write them in Arabic.

IRSHAD MANJI: You know what? You can invoke FOX News all you want, alright, in order to try to detract from the real issue here, but I challenge you to tell me: Where are the ordinary Muslims in the Islamic world pouring into the streets to demonstrate against Saudi Arabia’s policy to prevent Jews and Christians from stepping on the soil of Mecca, merely because they are Jews and Christians? Tell me! Where are those protests? Answer!

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Well, if you read Arabic, which you don’t, and maybe you want to learn it, you would realize that many writers and intellectuals have written about these issues, have condemned anti-Semitic writings wherever they occur. If they do not appear in certain demonstrations, because these governments do not allow the demonstrations—

IRSHAD MANJI: Where are the demonstrations?

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Once again, let me finish. And there’s another element here, Amy, in the story which I think—I mean, I have written about it on my blog which I think is important. I totally believe that these demonstrations have been instigated and have been set off by the Arab governments and Muslim governments themselves. These are corrupt bankrupt governments that are very much aware of the anger of their people about Israel and about U.S. foreign policy in the region and about wars, and I wish people are much more angry about occupation and about oppression and poverty, as well about Israeli brutality against the Palestinians, which your other guest would not dare talk about, of course, because O’Reilly wouldn’t invite her on that show to speak about that. But as it is, Arab governments realize that Denmark and Norway are easy targets to pick on, and that’s why they are letting their populations to let off steam on that subject. So there’s hypocrisy going on now from many different places on this very issue.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Irshad Manji, let me get your response to that question of protesting on other issues, as As’ad AbuKhalil has laid out.

IRSHAD MANJI: I’m not sure I understand the argument, Amy. Can you reprise it for me?

AMY GOODMAN: As’ad AbuKhalil, talking about your saying where are the demonstrations around government violence, around what is happening in the Occupied Territories, with the same kind of vehemence. Irshad Manji.

IRSHAD MANJI: Well, listen, I mean, if you want to talk about the Occupied Territories, let’s talk about that. There is—

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: No, you don’t. You never do.

IRSHAD MANJI: Hold on a second, sir. Let me answer this time. There are, for example, groups called, “Rabbis Against Human Rights” who do, in—sorry, Rabbis For Human Rights who do, in fact, organize Jewish protests against the occupation of the West Bank now and latterly of Gaza. But, again, where are we Muslims in this? Where are the “mullahs for human rights”? Where are we when beheadings take place? Where are the mullahs for human rights when it comes to defending the right of Jill Carroll or of Margaret Hassan, the woman who overtly expressed solidarity with the Iraqi people, was Executive Director of CARE in Iraq and was still assassinated? Where are we when it comes as imams and as religious leaders? Where are we when it comes to speaking out against honor killings, which happen at the rate of three times a day in Pakistan, and this is according to Amnesty International?

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Muslim women—

IRSHAD MANJI: Once again—

AMY GOODMAN: All right—

IRSHAD MANJI:—we have a lot of introspection to do, and ‘Mr. Angry Arab’ over there is angry only at the West, not at the Muslim imperialism against other Muslims.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Obviously—

AMY GOODMAN: As’ad AbuKhalil.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Obviously, you haven’t read my book on Saudi Arabia or others to know about my anger and how it’s expressed—

IRSHAD MANJI: No, because I’m ignorant, as far as you’re concerned.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: I find it interesting how many times, whenever you speak, whether here and elsewhere, you refer to yourself as Muslim. Personally, I am a human being, so I do not identify with any religion; but you conveniently do that to try to lend credibility on a subject on which you have no credibility. But it seems to me, it’s very offensive to all the brave Muslim women in the world who speak out and who demonstrate, and some of them get injured against honor killings and against the injustices. But you don’t know anything about them. You bring up issues—

IRSHAD MANJI: I don’t know anything about anything according to you.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: This is not O’Reilly. One second. Let me finish. It’s not a monologue for you here. And another thing is, when you speak about some rabbis who are in favor of peace, of course they exist. And there priests for peace. And there are Muslims for peace. But what is your argument here? You are trying to say that there are rabbis for peace, but they don’t exist in other religion that is Islam—

IRSHAD MANJI: Where are the mullahs for human rights?

AS’AD ABUKHALIL:—because there’s some genetic incompetence or inequality, and that’s because Jews and Christians are genetically superior to Muslims. I mean, this is your point, basically—it boils down to. It—

IRSHAD MANJI: That’s your insecurity talking, sir, not mine.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL:—inferiority, intellectually as well as politically to Arabs and Muslims, and you wish that this genius that is exhibited by people who are Jewish and Christian would spill over to the Muslim world. That’s what it boils down to, right?

IRSHAD MANJI: That’s your insecurity talking, sir, not mine.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to ask a question about the—

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: I don’t know what that means—

AMY GOODMAN: I want to ask two questions. One: As’ad AbuKhalil, you made an interesting comment about—you’re saying you think governments are behind the protests. Would you like to elaborate?

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Well, I certainly believe that many governments, like the oppressive governments of Syria and Jordan, I have noticed that the security forces have a long record of brutality and of torturing of people, have become extremely polite. And I’ve noticed the footage on the Arabic media, that they allow them basically to proceed peacefully and to speak out and, in the case of Damascus, to torch down the embassy of Denmark; and I find that to be very convenient for those governments, because they are very much under attack by their own people for being largely silent about foreign occupation by the United States and about oppression by these same governments. And this is an opportunity for them to let on some steam be expressed by those people, because Denmark is an easy country to pick on. And it seems to me—and they’re organizing a boycott of Denmark, when those same governments would not dare to launch a boycott of Israel or the United States, which have been responsible for more offenses against Arabs by virtue of occupations than the Denmark government is; and it is not responsible, I think, for cartoons that appear in one publication.

AMY GOODMAN: Irshad Manji.

IRSHAD MANJI: What “Mr. Angry Arab” there doesn’t seem to appreciate or care to acknowledge is that in the past 100 years alone, more Muslims have been tortured, imprisoned, raped, maimed and murdered at the hands of other Muslims than at the hands of any foreign imperial power. This is not to deny Western colonialism, not at all. It is to point out that colonialism comes in many shades and many colors, and if we’re going to have integrity as human rights advocates, then we also have to stand up on that front, and that’s what he seems to be forgetting.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: The last point I want—I mean, the thing I want to say, if the question of integrity of the last person to speak on that subject, especially on the subject of religion, and especially—

IRSHAD MANJI: You love personal attacks, don’t you?

AMY GOODMAN: We just have 30 seconds, but I want to ask about the continued publication of the cartoons, and I want to get each of your response to them. Irshad Manji?

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: I think it’s very obvious what’s going on—

AMY GOODMAN: As’ad AbuKhalil.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: There are people in the West who very much enjoy the opportunity to provoke Muslims and to offend them further, and Muslims feel offended on this very subject. But it seems to me, we should insist on the principle of freedom of speech and the right to offend people’s beliefs and values. But it seems to me, it doesn’t take much courage to offend Muslims in Western countries, which is exactly the polemical career of the other guest—

AMY GOODMAN: Irshad Manji, we have five seconds. Your response to that question.

IRSHAD MANJI: Yeah, bring on the cartoons, and let’s remember that more Muslims are offended by the violence in the name of these cartoons than they are by the cartoons themselves.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to end it there. Irshad Manji, author of The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in Her Faith, a Visiting Fellow at Yale University; and As’ad AbuKhalil, professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus. His blog is the Angry Arab News Service.

.................................................. .................................................. ..............................

Both bring up some good points:



About Manji and where i agree.:

Most of you know who she is. While i disagree with her on many points, particularly her generalizations and the people who back her, i agree that some muslims certainly do believe in some wacky things. The apostasy issue for instance, a significant number of orthodox Muslim scholars will say that in a caliphate it would constitute execution(whether those scholars promote terrorism or executions in a foriegn country is a different dispute)

Where i disagree with Manji: but lets face it, she seems like an opportunist, her so called hardship was really nothing more then what your typical gay or lesbian experiences(she comes from a sect of Islam known for it's liberalism, with the exception of the gay issue) TO be honest, i don't think she is really a muslim, i think she claims it to lend herself legitamacy.

She promotes separation of church and state, yet neo-conservatives, right wingers, evangelical christians, right wing jewish groups are her primary backers. THat was the first thing that caused great suspicians toward her with me.
She's a lesbian, a secularist, and very leftwing, yet she is supported by right wingers, and thus never speaks out against them.

Also, she fails to acknowledge the complexity of the muslim world, what is cultural, what isn't, the fact that some of the stuff 'muslims' are critiqued for are practiced by others. SHe makes lots of big generalizations, and greatly understates and often doesn't even talk about differences from sect to sect, from different schools of thought to different schools of thought, economic and political issues, how to differentiate 'real' religious talk rather then use of religious termonology when discussing politics.

Salman Rushdie is hated by muslims, and he probably hates them, but he atleast spoke out against Irag and has had consistent behavior. I think Salman Rushdie is being honest, despite my disagreements with his views, and his life story seems consistent as well. Not so with Manji



Asad: He's dead on about Syria and arab countries and protest. It's impossible to organize any riot or protest in an arab country without getting arrested or killed without government support.

In Bahrain, hundreds of demonstrators were jailed and interrogated because of their involvement in expressing their solidarity with Gaza this year as an example of this. Demonstrators were gunned down in KSA(Kingdom of saudi arabia)

Try and critique or act against the governments will in Syria, bad things will happen, at least thats what was told to me by some syrians(she was hot, even with the headscarf)

Though i think a bit crude and unprofessional, his personal attacks against manji were also relevant. She really either doesn't know or doesn't bother showing indepth knowledge of muslim history and basic knowledge.

The FOX comments were pretty damn funny.


Where i disagree with Asad:

Seriously, he should have limited his 'personal' attacks against Irshad manji and reworded his points rather then come off as insulting, despite the relevance of his claims and critiques. Also he let her dictate the debate, that was stupid.
Though he talks about cultural problems in the muslim world in his book, he failed to appropriatly touch on them in the interview other then saying, 'read my books'

Sophist
12th February 09, 08:46 AM
As’ad Abukhalil:
"And there are many outlets today that are reprinting those same cartoons that are offensive to Muslims in the name of freedom of speech, while people do not treat offenses to other religions in the same manner. And it seems to me, if you insist on people having the right to depict in any way they want all prophets, as I do—I mean, I would love to have mocking of all religions. But people don’t do that. People are very selective in what religion can be mocked and ridiculed by comedians and by cartoonists in many Western countries."
While he may have some good points, this seriously injures his argument.

Christianity frequently and commonly faces insults that, aimed at a Muslim target, would result in death threats. The cartoons were really fucking mild by the standards of Christian-baiting.
Consider these two examples:
Chris Ofili's Turner-Prize winning exhibit - a portrait of Virgin Mary made with elephant dung and cutouts from pornographic magazines:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/459846.stm
Jerry Springer: The Opera
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Springer_-_The_Opera

I don't often have cause to speak out in favour of an organised religion, but mainstream Christianity, on the whole, manages to coexist with shit designed especially to provoke it without demanding the lives of those who produced said shit. "People do not treat offenses to other religions in the same manner" - damn straight, Islam is treated with kid gloves compared to almost every other religion out there solely because insulting it brings the risk of fatwa. And yes, the Jewish culture gets an easier ride than Christianity, but then the shadow of the Holocaust still hangs heavy over our world sixty years on.

I think Irshad Manji is very likely blind to some of the complexities of the modern Islamic world; but As’ad Abukhalil seems here to be performing the unsavoury task of being an apologist for the extremists with the aid of straw men and ad hominems.

It is less than helpful, for instance, that he was unable or unwilling to give more details of the alleged protestors of anti-Semitism in the Muslim world; surely, when your opponent asks "Where are the “mullahs for human rights”?", if you can name some names, you damn well name them. His claims of widespread protest were consistently vague generalities, and that he moved into misrepresenting her argument as a claim of Arab racial inferiority made him look very bad indeed. It appeared to me that he did not really want the real extent of this protest to be considered, dissected and compared to the level of protest in Western countries, because if it were, his side would fall to pieces.

Islam as a religion is not necessarily to blame for the viciously repressive nature of the Islamic countries; the Catholic Church was scarcely less repressive in medieval Europe. However, where there is a close marriage of religion and state, it gives free reign to religious leaders to punish all who disagree with them, and many or most of such leaders choose to avail themselves of this. Admitting this is the root cause, however, of the difference in levels of protest and free speech between Middle Eastern countries and the West would, I think, force As'ad Abukhalil to re-examine his views; yes, the West has some severe flaws, but just because Christian fundamentalists and FOX News are wrong, that does not transform radical Islamic theocracies into being right or in any form justifiable.

To defend Islam itself from being tainted from the evils carried out in its name by such theocracies, I think a smart debater would want to fasten on Turkey in particular - a country which has a resolutely secular political tradition, a modern democracy, a country sufficiently well-developed that discussion of the possibility of it joining the European Union has a certain plausibility about it.

AAAhmed46
12th February 09, 09:33 AM
His problem was he basically dismissed it all saying "hey read my books"

and "Manji, your stupid"

Though the o'reilly comments were awesome in the truest sense.


Yeah, but christiansy have been inside western liberal democracies for far far longer then Islam has.

Most europians probably never met any muslims until what? 1960's?

I personally believe alot is friction from modernization.

Eric margolis writes how extremism and sensitivity is a result of modernization, particularly the internet and satelite television.

Christianity faces so much inult without reaction because it's done so for very long. Galeleo was persecuted. As time went one, more like him stood up, and reactions were more and more mild.

Look at muslims: Rushdie(bad reaction) Danish cartoons and teddy bears(Very bad reaction) then comes fitna by geert wilders(Medium bad) more books and stuff(less bad)

The thick skin is already developing.

WarPhalange
12th February 09, 02:21 PM
God damn, I am THIS CLOSE --| |-- to banning you right now on the grounds of tl;dr

WarPhalange
12th February 09, 02:21 PM
Of course, I don't have the power to ban, so all I can do is get angry at you. And I am. Very angry...

AAAhmed46
12th February 09, 05:47 PM
whats tl;dr?

EuropIan
12th February 09, 05:50 PM
http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/

AAAhmed46
12th February 09, 06:27 PM
It looks longer then it really is.

Virus
12th February 09, 09:41 PM
In future you might want to consider a summary and a link.

WarPhalange
12th February 09, 11:41 PM
It looks longer then it really is.

That's what she said.

Virus
14th February 09, 10:46 PM
Unlike Sam Harris, he does not promote dropping a nuclear weapon on the Muslim world.

He doesn't promote this. He said a cold-war nuclear standoff is not possible with a country that embraces martyrdom so a first-strike may be justified if it came to that.


i agree that some Muslims certainly do believe in some wacky things.

All Muslims believe in completely wacky things. Ahmed, if you would indulge me in an answer; Do you believe that Muhammed was a normal man or do you believe he talked to angels?

AAAhmed46
16th February 09, 03:22 AM
Look at all his stuff in detail.


As for what i believe in, i lean toward the possibility that he did, there were no major schools of philosophy in arabia and he never came in contact with the greeks. Yet the topics of discussion and the stories are heavyly theme ridden. He could be accused of being a liar due to the level of detail he has for biblical/jewish legends. But then, what about his confidence? Even before coming to power, when he and his followers were nothing, what explains that confidence?

Basically, a rudementary wording of my thoughts, id go into detail for it, but id have to go deep into my memory to rembember WHAT it was that led me to these conclusions, and i would have to re-read lots of stuff.


HOwver, im very veyr very open to the possibiliy that ther is no god, that life has no real meanig, that there isn't any higher power. Im very open to that, i was pretty much almost an athiest in highschool.

THough i wouldn't say so now, you could say im an agnostic that practices islam, and leans toward it, i wouldn't say i have complete faith.

Even in my nigh-athiest days, i never viewed islam like you and other haters, and im surprised at the claims some people make about islam.

Virus
16th February 09, 05:31 AM
As for what i believe in, i lean toward the possibility that he did, there were no major schools of philosophy in arabia and he never came in contact with the greeks. Yet the topics of discussion and the stories are heavyly theme ridden. He could be accused of being a liar due to the level of detail he has for biblical/jewish legends. But then, what about his confidence? Even before coming to power, when he and his followers were nothing, what explains that confidence?

So you accept that Muhammad talked to angels and was therefore a legitimate prophet. Do you accept Joseph Smith talked to angels and is a legitimate prophet or did he just make it up?

AAAhmed46
17th February 09, 11:15 PM
So you accept that Muhammad talked to angels and was therefore a legitimate prophet. Do you accept Joseph Smith talked to angels and is a legitimate prophet or did he just make it up?



Don't know enough about joseph smith to be honest.

socratic
18th February 09, 01:12 AM
Don't know enough about joseph smith to be honest.

He used to chill with the Archangel of America and founded Mormonism.

Ahmed, if my understanding of your previous posts (much previous) is correct, don't you participate in/have completed a degree in Middle Eastern Studies?

You said that there were not any other major philosophies present during Mohammed's time, and that makes me curious: Certainly, was there not at least one offshoot of Christianity being practiced in the area at the time? How did the Quran come by Christian materials (even if they were nonstandard Christian materials) if there weren't practicioners? And weren't there some major Greek populations in the Middle East, or had they all died by Mohammed's time?

Zendetta
18th February 09, 01:52 AM
Virus, what's the longest session of sitting meditation that you've ever done?

Virus
18th February 09, 02:16 AM
Does playing Call of Duty 4 count as meditation?

Virus
18th February 09, 04:24 AM
Don't know enough about joseph smith to be honest.

He was a guy who went off by himself then came back claiming to have talked to angles and declared himself a prophet and founder of the r34l religion. Where have we heard that story before?

EuropIan
18th February 09, 05:41 AM
"Joseph Smith was called a prophet
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
He started the Mormon religion
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
Joseph Smith was called a prophet-

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
Many people believed Joseph
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
And that night he-ee saw an angel
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

Joseph Smith was called a prophet
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

He found the stones and golden plates
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
Even though nobody else ever saw them
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

And that's how the Book of Mormon was written
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
Dumb dadumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
Dumb dadumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
Dahumb dahumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
Dumb dumb dumb dumb duuumb, duuumb.

Martin went home to his wife
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
And showed her pages from the Book of Mormon
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

Lucy Harris smart smart smart
Smart smart smart smart smart

Martin Harris dumb dadumb-

Lucy Harris smart smart smart
Martin Harris dumb.
So Martin went on back to Smith
Said the pages had gone away
Smith got mad and told Martin
He needed to go pray
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb. "

Aphid Jones
18th February 09, 11:35 AM
He was a guy who went off by himself then came back claiming to have talked to angles and declared himself a prophet and founder of the r34l religion. Where have we heard that story before? He deliberately copied Mohammed in many ways, but that's another story.

"We will trample down our enemies and make it one gore of blood…from the Rocky Mountains to the Atlantic Ocean. I will be to this generation a second Mohomet, whose motto in treating for peace was 'the Al-Qur'an or the sword.' So shall it be with us — 'Joseph Smith or the sword!'"

He also ripped off many legends throughout history, both Abrahamic and not. But that's another story too.

Fearless Ukemi
18th February 09, 01:30 PM
He was a guy who went off by himself then came back claiming to have talked to angles and declared himself a prophet and founder of the r34l religion. Where have we heard that story before?

Joseph Smith did not produce the artifacts he said he was supposedly given. Moses, OTOH, at least came back with something tangible.

Edit: I guess your comparison was to Mohammad.

AAAhmed46
21st February 09, 12:01 AM
He used to chill with the Archangel of America and founded Mormonism.

Ahmed, if my understanding of your previous posts (much previous) is correct, don't you participate in/have completed a degree in Middle Eastern Studies?

You said that there were not any other major philosophies present during Mohammed's time, and that makes me curious: Certainly, was there not at least one offshoot of Christianity being practiced in the area at the time? How did the Quran come by Christian materials (even if they were nonstandard Christian materials) if there weren't practicioners? And weren't there some major Greek populations in the Middle East, or had they all died by Mohammed's time?


No i don't have a degree, but i took some courses and studied stuff in anthropology. Right now im working on a social work diploma and hopefully a degree, but i may change majors and go for poli-sci.


There were christian materials, around, but mohammed encountered them for roughly two weeks when he was a little kid, tahts it. He spent most of his time among the pagan arabs. I know the legends that are in the bible are something the pagans would be aware of.

But from what we know of mohammed, an illiterate prophet, worked as a negotiator for his wife(she was a merchant, not him) im surprised some of the themes and questions rasied in the quran could come from such a mind, especially considering the state of arabian culture AT THAT TIME in his area. If it were all meant to be taken matter of fact, why have so much allegrory and fill stories with theme? I don't think it was all meant to be taken literally, the language it self is so damn flowery. Also, if he were to have known of christian and jewish scripture, it would have had to have been detailed study(at the standards of education at that time) which is pretty hard for a guy like him to do considering where he spent most of his life and his education.



BUt it's possible the arabs WERE great philosophers, it could be very veyr possible mohammed was a highly educated man, and history was twisted.

Im very open to the fact that perhaps there is no god, perhaps mohammed was just a crazy dude who thought he talked to angels.

Or maybe we got it totally wrong.

Which is why i consider my self more of an agnostic who leans toward islam, then a hardcore super-muslim.

Virus
22nd February 09, 04:02 AM
There were christian materials, around, but mohammed encountered them for roughly two weeks when he was a little kid, tahts it. He spent most of his time among the pagan arabs.

But from what we know of mohammed, an illiterate prophet, worked as a negotiator for his wife(she was a merchant, not him) im surprised some of the themes and questions rasied in the quran could come from such a mind, especially considering the state of arabian culture AT THAT TIME in his area. If it were all meant to be taken matter of fact, why have so much allegrory and fill stories with theme? I don't think it was all meant to be taken literally, the language it self is so damn flowery. Also, if he were to have known of christian and jewish scripture, it would have had to have been detailed study(at the standards of education at that time) which is pretty hard for a guy like him to do considering where he spent most of his life and his education.



BUt it's possible the arabs WERE great philosophers, it could be very veyr possible mohammed was a highly educated man, and history was twisted.

Im very open to the fact that perhaps there is no god, perhaps mohammed was just a crazy dude who thought he talked to angels.

Or maybe we got it totally wrong.

Which is why i consider my self more of an agnostic who leans toward islam, then a hardcore super-muslim.

I know what you mean. While I may come across as a hardline atheist I actually consider myself more of an agnostic who leans towards the Space Wizard.

But if I can return to something you said in your post, what bits do you think couldn't have been written by a person?

Virus
24th February 09, 06:36 AM
Which is why i consider my self more of an agnostic who leans toward islam, then a hardcore super-muslim.

Do you not say this on a daily basis?

"There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah."

So when you say it, do you believe in what you are saying or don't you?

Aphid Jones
24th February 09, 09:23 AM
Do you feel compelled to rez these threads because every day you don't argue with a Muslim, a Djinn comes at night and puts sand in your eyes?

Robot Jesus
25th February 09, 05:48 AM
a former coworkers was both the most devout Muslim and the most westernized Muslim I've ever met. He was working on his poli-sci degree so he lacked the whole "the Joows control everything and the Arab world is being oppressed" thing. Had his head screwed on really tight and was very insightful about the culture his parents came from

he also believes that djinn prefer rock to rap.

Virus
25th February 09, 06:53 AM
Do you feel compelled to rez these threads because every day you don't argue with a Muslim, a Djinn comes at night and puts sand in your eyes?

I can ask questions if I want. What do you care?

AAAhmed46
27th February 09, 09:18 PM
Do you not say this on a daily basis?

"There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah."

So when you say it, do you believe in what you are saying or don't you?

But what if he is? I can say that, because if there is a god, probably is just god, and I do think the quran is very out of place from where it was concieved, so i do think yeah, he probably was a prophet.

But maybe he wasn't ;D and i could be wrong.



EDIT:

TO some it up, yeah i believe Mo was a prophet. But im not so firm in my belief that i totally disregard the position that i could be wrong.

AAAhmed46
27th February 09, 09:18 PM
a former coworkers was both the most devout Muslim and the most westernized Muslim I've ever met. He was working on his poli-sci degree so he lacked the whole "the Joows control everything and the Arab world is being oppressed" thing. Had his head screwed on really tight and was very insightful about the culture his parents came from

he also believes that djinn prefer rock to rap.


BLASPHEMY!!!!

Virus
28th February 09, 10:30 AM
But what if he is? I can say that, because if there is a god, probably is just god, and I do think the quran is very out of place from where it was concieved, so i do think yeah, he probably was a prophet.


Can you give me an example of this material that couldn't have come from a sixth century Arab?