Originally posted by Mostly Harmless
Ok. so those 2 neurons are at it again, are they?
Nope, It’s four now, I’ve been multiplying!!!! Look out world!!!!
Since it seems you have studied Islam, (MH, can I call you MaH?), you are no doubt acquainted with the Arabic term ‘shirk’ (don’t remember how to spell it), as it applies to putting something in the place of god? I will use that term a few times here, to make my point of what I think are things that Islam makes ‘shirk’.
God is not "an Arabic god" the K'ran was revealed in arabic because....wait for it.... Mohammad was ARABIC!! Had the K'ran been revealed in Japanese or English there is a strong possibility that Mohammad would'nt have understood a single friggin word!
Yep, M was Arabic, if you look at his understanding of the world, the Koran & his dealing with the outside world, it was Arabic too. And most Muslims put the Arabic language up, in a high pedestal, such as Pickhall in his Forward to his translation, “The Koran cannot be translated. That is the belief of old-fashioned Sheykhs and the view of the present writer. The Book is here rendered almost literally and every effort has been made to choose befitting language. But the result is not the Glorious Koran, that inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which move men to tears and ecstasy. It is only an attempt to present the meaning of the Koran – and peradventure something of the charm – in English. It can never take the place of the Koran in Arabic, nor is it meant to do so.” In my many discussions and heated debates with Muslims, (at Fresno State, several Malaysian neighbors and schoolmates tried to convert me, the others didn’t try, they were just into school & stuff), they all stated that the Koran was not translatable, it could only be understood in Arabic. Because anything else, would not be the Koran. My point is, that if this ‘allah’ is the “God of the Universe”, he would be more multilingual. And his people would not have to learn Arabic, to get the Koran’s true meaning. That would make ‘allah’, what we Mexicans call a stuttered in other languages, right? My belief is that, if the Bible or the Koran are the Word of God, then it should be able to speak to all peoples, at all times, through all circumstances, in whatever language that person speaks. I shouldn’t have to learn Arabic, English or Spanish to talk to the ‘God of the Universe’. As a Chicano (a US-born Mexican), I have seen and experienced first-hand, cultural imperialism expressed in many forms, but the enforcing & elevated status of the invaders’ language, is one of the first things that happens in the attempt to subjugate the recently conquered. Spain, France, England, & the Arabs just went about it in slightly different ways. Putting Arabic in such high status, to me implies cultural imperialism, it is ‘shirk’. To me it would be the same thing; as if you could only be a Christian if you knew & spoke Aramaic, dressed in middle-eastern clothes, prayed in the direction of Jerusalem and followed all the old traditions of the 1st Century. What do you think?
A little sidebar: Find the origin of the word “Hispanic” in modern political & media discourse. Where did it come from? It’s a Nixonian term that is all-inclusive, so that the fanatical support that Republicans (at that time), got from anti-communist Cubans, could be spread to include all the so-called ‘Hispanics’, implying that Mexicans, Puerto Ricans & others supported Republicans too.
THe reason why it was revealed in arabic was also because the Prophet M is meant to be the figurehead muslim. Islam being a way of life has to be understood by the person (the Prophet) establishing that way of life and each and every other person who adheres to it. If he, his followers didnt understand it, then how could they live their life according to it?
It was revealed in Arabic, because M was Arabic, Islam reveals nothing, but a pre-islamic Arabic way of thought. Why is Mecca the ‘Qibla’, why must Muslims make a once in a lifetime journey to Mecca? Who is this, ‘allah’? What does the cresent moon represent on top of mosques? Where did this ‘allah’ come from, since it seems that his name predates M, whose father was named ‘Abdullah, son of Abdul’?
My answer is that M & the Arabs were jealous that Jews & Christians had their own gods, so M being a good Arab, gave Arabs a god they could worship, and changed things enough so that it was closer to monotheism, but with a decidedly Arabic flavor. And just like Joseph Smith was American, so the Mormon books were in English, etc. etc… M developed an interesting ‘Arabic’ religion.
No Sunshine, thats your twisted interpretation. Praying in the direction of Mecca creates a sense of togetherness for muslims. it is their 'holy place of worship'.
So, explain to me Moonshine, if this so called ‘god of the universe’ is the ‘God of the Universe’, why’d he change his mind? Jerusalem, Mecca, Mecca, Jerusalem, enie, meanie, minie, moe? Anyway, to me it’s ‘shirk’, to even think that you should pray in that direction, it makes Mecca an idol, which is ‘shirk’.
I'm sure you wouldnt have complained if everyone prayed in the direction of Washinton D.C. And you know what, if the US had existed then, maybe it would have been.
People here in the US & across the world, already pray toward DC, they worship at the idol of power & money. That’s ‘shirk’ too!!
But it wasnt, so stop whinging about 'why do they pray facing there, it must be because their God is a camel-jockey". wrong. Islam says 'there is only one God' that included the Christian one and Judaistic one.
I don’t know who this ‘allah’ dude is, but he sounds an awful like what Paul was warning about in the ‘Letter to the Galatians’, chapter 1, verses 6 – 9, and to quote v.8,” But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!”
However, there are no "satanic verses". what you may be refering to is supernatural beliefs.
That’s because they were taken out, one of the early caliphs had all copies & fragments of the Koran burned, so that only the few approved copies would survive, all others would have to be copies of these 4 standards. Ask yourself why does the Koran go from longest verses (suras) to shortest, why are they not in chronolgical order, as given by M?
If I could add a little sidebar here: I think that the origin of the name ‘California’ from a Spanish novel, was a hispanisized version of “Calif Ornia”, after the real life “Caliph Orma”, just a guess.
there are verses in the K'ran that are seen - yes, even by muslims - as very powerful verses. Now, as we all know, power can be used for good or bad, they are the flip side of each other. These verses are purportedly used by people who dable in the supernatural to bring about or help bring about changes in peoples lives; get better if sick, do better at jobs etc., and some purportedly 'use' them to get the opposite effect.
Interesting little sidebar.
except Islam says, no insists, that Islam should be spread through example, i.e. living the way of life, not by battle, which is allowed for self defence.
I supposed that the Byzantine, Persian, Vandal & Visigothic empires just happened to start those little wars of Islamic conquest in 632AD?
and, Islam does not ask to 'conquer' the world.
So what does ‘dar al-harb’ and ‘dar al-Islam’ mean? Is not all the non-islamic world open for battle, plunder, and conversion as part of 'the land of war'? And I suppose that in 632AD, Muslims were content to send Koran-toting missionaries to the rest of the world? As opposed to sword-wielding?
Christianity tried that in its 'crusades' (thanks to bush we're in the middle ages again).
Nothing personal, but why does everybody always bring up the Crusades without putting in timelines & causes?
Ok, genius, which came first? Islamic oppression & denial of entry into the Holy Land to Christian pilgrims? Or the Crusades? What’s your answer?
Mine is: The Crusades were a not-so-Christian hijadic response to Islamic pressures.
Ok, genius, second question, what’s the difference between Christian & Islamic warfare in the Middle Ages?
My answer is: Nothing, they were both brutal, thought they had god on their side, knew they were right & their swords didn’t always distinguish who the non-combatants were that they slew.
Last question, what’s the difference between Jihad & Crusade?
My answer is: nothing, they both have spiritual & war-like meanings, etc...
Hinduism is based on that belief in fact, and goes beyond to subjugate or destroy all others. the aryan theory Nazis favoured was borrowed directly from those very texts. the swastika the symbol of world domination also was taken from such militaristic hinduism. By the way, both are on the rise.
Another interesting sidebar!!
You're talking complete and utter rubbish here and just repeating your own brainwashing. Islam never speaks of Moses or Jesus with disrespect
By trying to co-opt them, Islam makes both Moses & Jesus Muslims, your imam must not be telling you about the many things that Islam says about Jesus, Christians and their place in the Koran. Jesus is also mentioned in the Mormon books too, just not the real Jesus; Islam, same difference. So, are you brainwashed too??? Or are you the perfect one, the totally objective, totally logical one?
(they couldnt be good or bad muslims as Islam did not exist then! DUH!!!) they were/and are more than that, they are also in Islam, ...Prophets! the k'ran brings them into its own ambit so that they are never disrespected.
I know, but that doesn’t stop people from trying to re-invent Jesus, in their image or ideal. And since Arabs had over 600 years to get acquainted with Jesus, M found all sorts of stuff to use for his Koran, making it poetry, literature, a cultural time-capsule of Arabic life and ideals, but not a holy book. Anyway, who are you going to believe more on what Jesus said, did or who he was; the followers of Jesus or the followers of M? Who would tend to want you to follow the real Jesus more? And who would want you to follow an imitation?
Islam is a progression of the same religion of God hence 'people of the Book', but sets out a way of life this time.
I don’t beg to differ, I INSIST that Islam is a
false religion, that all true ‘Muslims’ (those that submit to God), well be Christians in name & deed, no matter what language they speak, ethnic origin, or race. And that being ‘after’, does not make you a ‘progressive’ religion, it just makes you only ‘after’. And I think, Islam is not a progression, but a 45 degree turn, it has enough similarities, but just different enough to lead astray.
remember, Islam (unlike Christianity) does not make a god out of its Prophets (incl. Mohammad). It sets out cleary in a verse that We have chosen one from amonst you. it reiterates that Prophet M is a man chosen from amonst man, as fallible. but the thrust is, that if he can do it, so can you.
I beg to differ, look at the status M is afforded, it’s ‘shirk’ to me. Giving him halos, oaths by his beard, etc...
This of course threatens Christianity because it makes their semi-god Jesus into a prophet, a mere man. a religion which askes for no religios pundits (priests) to give you a link directly with God.
Actually, Islam does this too, by saying Jesus will be helping God judge the dead on the Day of Judgment. Whether Jesus is who the Christians or Muslims say he is, is the question of salvation: in Matthew chapter 16, verses 13 – 20, quoting v. 15, “ But what about you?” he asked, “Who do you say I am?”
Note the joining of forces of Christian Evangelism and Orthodox Judaism. repeated here in the US, Israel and Palistine etc. paradox.
No paradox, both Christian Fundamentalist & Evangelicals think that this modern State of Israel is a sign of the Last Days, so they support what they think is God’s plan. The modern, secular Jews want a country of their own, and Orthodox Jews ‘know’ that God gave that land to ancient Israel, so they are there to re-claim it. So, where's the paradox genius? It just a confluence of historical & religious circumstances, that if you knew a little about either people's beliefs or histories you would know. For Jews & Christians, in regards to Israel, their only problem is, those pesky Palestinians, they just won’t go away, like all previously conquered people usually do. Anyway, I find it sadly ironic that both Jews and Arabs greet others with ‘peace’, ‘shalom’ and ‘salaam’.
)