Islam is a bad religion...prove otherwise...

[marv]

I have tried on numerous occasions to have a dialogue with Moslems. On each occasion, they cease communicating when the validity of their "religion" is brought up by me. I challenge any Moslem to defend their "religion".

Then open a new thread and lets do it

Consider it done.

The purpose of this thread is not to slam or flame Islam, but to point out certain characteristics I, and many others, find discordant in that particular religion.

First, Islam is not strictly a religion, but a theistic/political/social/military movement with roots deep in ancient Arab tribalism and practices. Theistically, it is an amalgam of ancient Judaism, early Christianity and the polytheism of the ancient Arabs. Politically, it is fascism and claims the whole world (Ummah) to itself exclusively. Socially, it is male dominated to the extreme and appeals mostly to uneducated and socially displaced males. Militaristically, it is aggressive and uses the term "army of god" in a very real sense with the intent of driving the "infidel" from the face of the Earth.

"Allah" originated as "Hubar", also known as "al-ilah" (from which the final name was derived), an ancient moon-god worshipped by various tribes extant on the Arabian peninsula and in the surrounding lands. "Hubar" was the chief god in the Arab pantheon. Other deities represented the Sun, stars and such things as rocks, trees, bodies of water, etc. In this, Allah parallels the Yahweh of the Jews, the pre-cursor to the Christian's Jehovah. In the first commandment (also accepted by Christians and Moslems), Yahweh admonished the Jews to "...have no other gods before me." In other words, neither Yahweh nor his "descendants", Jehovah and Allah, are the deities of monotheism. This commandment is the undeniable, tacit acknowledgment of other deities.

I have just begun, but are there any comments so far?

 

[lostminotaur]

First, Islam is not strictly a religion, but a theistic/political/social/military movement with roots deep in ancient Arab tribalism and practices.

I guess then you'll have to put forward a definition of what constitutes 'religion' for you... secondly, even if it has its roots in ancient arab tribalism and practices.. so what?

Theistically, it is an amalgam of ancient Judaism, early Christianity and the polytheism of the ancient Arabs.

It is not necessarily an amalgam, but it is a continuation from ancient Judaism and Christianity... still, so what?

Politically, it is fascism and claims the whole world (Ummah) to itself exclusively.

most religions claim the whole world to themselves... it is in the spirit of spreading their faith... i don't see what's the big deal about it...

Socially, it is male dominated to the extreme and appeals mostly to uneducated and socially displaced males.

the whole planet is dominated by males.. it doesn't really boost your point..
aren't you being a 'tad' bit judgemental saying that it appeals to mostly uneducated people?

Militaristically, it is aggressive and uses the term "army of god" in a very real sense with the intent of driving the "infidel" from the face of the Earth.

only if you believe in the version of islam spouted by Osama bin laden and to some extent the Taliban...

:m:

 

[surenderer]

I have tried on numerous occasions to have a dialogue with Moslems. On each occasion, they cease communicating when the validity of their "religion" is brought up by me. I challenge any Moslem to defend their "religion".Consider it done.

The purpose of this thread is not to slam or flame Islam, but to point out certain characteristics I, and many others, find discordant in that particular religion.

First, Islam is not strictly a religion, but a theistic/political/social/military movement with roots deep in ancient Arab tribalism and practices. Theistically, it is an amalgam of ancient Judaism, early Christianity and the polytheism of the ancient Arabs. Politically, it is fascism and claims the whole world (Ummah) to itself exclusively. Socially, it is male dominated to the extreme and appeals mostly to uneducated and socially displaced males. Militaristically, it is aggressive and uses the term "army of god" in a very real sense with the intent of driving the "infidel" from the face of the Earth.

"Allah" originated as "Hubar", also known as "al-ilah" (from which the final name was derived), an ancient shipped by various tribes extant on the Arabian peninsula and in the surrounding lands. "Hubar" was the chief god in the Arab pantheon. Other deities represented the Sun, stars and such things as rocks, trees, bodies of water, etc. In this, Allah parallels the Yahweh of the Jews, the pre-cursor to the Christian's Jehovah. In the first commandment (also accepted by Christians and Moslems), Yahweh admonished the Jews to "...have no other gods before me." In other words, neither Yahweh nor his "descendants", Jehovah and Allah, are the deities of monotheism. This commandment is the undeniable, tacit acknowledgment of other deities.

I have just begun, but are there any comments so far?

Ok cool I hope you mean it when you say you want dialogue and not to flame because the former I will respond to the latter(sp?) I wont bother with

First, Islam is not strictly a religion, but a theistic/political/social/military movement with roots deep in ancient Arab tribalism and practices

Partly true Partly not true.....during Islam's conception things such as female infantcide was common in Arabia which was outlawed as was murder etc....all of which the Koran forbids

Socially, it is male dominated to the extreme and appeals mostly to uneducated and socially displaced males.

Totally untrue....today it's the worlds fastest growing religion( and not just in the ghettos) and historically it has brought Algebra, Geometry, Medicine Astronomy etc.....

Militaristically, it is aggressive and uses the term "army of god" in a very real sense with the intent of driving the "infidel" from the face of the Earth.

Again untrue....although if you wanna use OBL as an example (which I'm sure you will) he would say that......I mean think about this 1 outta every 5 people on the planet are Muslim....so that means that either they are all bad muslims or they all wanna drive you (as an infidel) from the planet....is that happening?

Allah" originated as "Hubar", also known as "al-ilah" (from which the final name was derived), an ancient shipped by various tribes extant on the Arabian peninsula and in the surrounding lands. "Hubar" was the chief god in the Arab pantheon

Sorry not true again More importantly, it should also be noted that the Arabic word "Allah" contains a deep religious message due to its root meaning and origin. This is because it stems from the Arabic verb ta'allaha (or alaha), which means "to be worshipped". (knowing Arabic has it's advantages ) Thus in Arabic, the word "Allah" means "The One who deserves all worship".Plus, it is important to note that "Allah" is the same word that Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews use for God. If you pick up an Arabic Bible, you will see the word "Allah" being used where "God" is used in English This is because "Allah" is the only word in the Arabic language equivalent to the English word "God" with a capital "G". Additionally, the word "Allah" cannot be made plural or given gender (i.e. masculine or feminine), which goes hand-in-hand with the Islamic concept of God. Because of this, and also because the Qur'an, which is the holy scripture of Muslims, was revealed in the Arabic language, some Muslims use the word "Allah" for "God", even when they are speaking other languages. This is not unique to the word "Allah", since many Muslims tend to use Arabic words when discussing Islamic issues, regardless of the language which they speak. This is because the universal teachings of Islam - even though they have been translated in every major language - have been preserved in the Arabic language




I find it interesting that this whole thread started because of "Preaching" that someone started and you found so insulting yet you open a thread doing the same thing......kinda sad

.

 

[marv]

To keep things in focus, and if it's acceptable, let's limit the discussion first to Islam as a religion. Then take up political, social and militaristic aspects. On posting board threads, things do tend to get confusing if not done in an orderly fashion.

I've attempted dialogues with two Saudi journalists and another in Yemen; also with a businessman in Malaysia and a woman and her fiance in England. All of them wanted to convince me that Islam is the "true" religion although I had told them that I am an atheist and am only interested in why they were adherents of Islam, especially the fiance in England, a convert. Be assured, I am not at all interested in "converting" to anything; not Christianity, Judaism, Hindu, Islam or any theism. If anyone wants an explanation as to why I happen to be an atheist, I'd be happy to explain, but I will not proselytize. Nor will I ever denigrate anyone's choice of belief system. Those are personal choices and not my business.
So, to continue......

For lostminotaur........................

I guess then you'll have to put forward a definition of what constitutes 'religion' for you...

...the same as you would find in any dictionary.

secondly, even if it has its roots in ancient arab tribalism and practices.. so what?

Simply put, past is prologue.

It is not necessarily an amalgam, but it is a continuation from ancient Judaism and Christianity... still, so what?

It's an amalgam because it contains modified elements of the three pre-cursors; Judaism, Christianity and the Arab polytheistic pantheon.

As to political, social and military matters, that should be discussed later.

For surenderer........................

[statement by marv]

First, Islam is not strictly a religion, but a theistic/political /social/military movement with roots deep in ancient Arab tribalism and practices

[response by surenderer]

Partly true Partly not true.....during Islam's conception things such as female infantcide was common in Arabia which was outlawed as was murder etc....all of which the Koran forbids

You prove my point about the nature of Islam. In non-moslem societies, murder is defined, made illegal and punished as a matter of law enacted by the people and the state, not by church authorities. This is the separation of church and state which Islam broaches.

[statement by marv]

Allah" originated as "Hubar", also known as "al-ilah" (from which the final name was derived), an ancient moon-god worshipped by various tribes extant on the Arabian peninsula and in the surrounding lands. "Hubar" was the chief god in the Arab pantheon.

[response by surenderer]

Sorry not true again More importantly, it should also be noted that the Arabic word "Allah" contains a deep religious message due to its root meaning and origin. This is because it stems from the Arabic verb ta'allaha (or alaha), which means "to be worshipped". (knowing Arabic has it's advantages ) Thus in Arabic, the word "Allah" means "The One who deserves all worship".Plus, it is important to note that "Allah" is the same word that Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews use for God. If you pick up an Arabic Bible, you will see the word "Allah" being used where "God" is used in English This is because "Allah" is the only word in the Arabic language equivalent to the English word "God" with a capital "G". Additionally, the word "Allah" cannot be made plural or given gender (i.e. masculine or feminine), which goes hand-in-hand with the Islamic concept of God. Because of this, and also because the Qur'an, which is the holy scripture of Muslims, was revealed in the Arabic language, some Muslims use the word "Allah" for "God", even when they are speaking other languages. This is not unique to the word "Allah", since many Muslims tend to use Arabic words when discussing Islamic issues, regardless of the language which they speak. This is because the universal teachings of Islam - even though they have been translated in every major language - have been preserved in the Arabic language

Refer to my statement. I wasn't discussing the derivation or gender of the word "allah", but rather the origin of the deity worshipped by moslems.The parenthetical referrence to the derivation of the name was informational as presented to me, but should probably have included "also known as 'al-ilah'". That was my error. But Hubar and al-ilah were two popular moon gods of the pre-Islamic Arabs. That much is documented and verified by archeological evidence.

I find it interesting that this whole thread started because of "Preaching" that someone started...

It was mentioned in that thread, but this thread was started in response to your request. I do not "preach" anything - everyone has their choice of belief system free of compulsion by others. It's possible to comple the body, but much more difficult to compel the mind.

...and you found so insulting yet you open a thread doing the same thing......kinda sad

Not true at all. I was not "insulted" in the other thread, and I think that I have adequately explained my motives and goals in this one. I will stop posting in this thread when civility ends in this thread.

Now speaking strictly in the religious sense, and ignoring political, social and military aspects, everything I have found about Islam shows it to be a theology lacking certain (to me) essential elements. For instance, it's forbidden to lie to another moslem, but acceptable to lie to non-moslems under certain circumstances. What about the unequivocal and straight-forward commandment of "Thou shalt not lie."?

How can animal sacrifice - for whatever purpose - during Hajji be explained? What has been offered by moslem sources is that it is not to request favor, but to give thanks. I find this explanation without merit. To kill an animal for a religious purpose is a "sacrifice" regardless of the purpose.

 

[surenderer]

Marv,

Be assured, I am not at all interested in "converting" to anything; not Christianity, Judaism, Hindu, Islam or any theism. If anyone wants an explanation as to why I happen to be an atheist, I'd be happy to explain, but I will not proselytize. Nor will I ever denigrate anyone's choice of belief system. Those are personal choices and not my business.

Fair enough nor am I...... and I agree

You prove my point about the nature of Islam. In non-moslem societies, murder is defined, made illegal and punished as a matter of law enacted by the people and the state, not by church authorities. This is the separation of church and state which Islam broaches.

Oh I agree with you there is no seperation of church and state in Islam. No other religion(as far as I know) details how to govern politics etc in their religous doctrine like Islam does. In the Koran it tells how to run your "state" when to fight and when not to...when to make peace and when not to.....etc.... I dont know of any other religion that does this.

For instance, it's forbidden to lie to another moslem, but acceptable to lie to non-moslems under certain circumstances. What about the unequivocal and straight-forward commandment of "Thou shalt not lie."?

This is what the Koran says about liars ......"God guides not one who is a prodigal, a liar" (40:28). "God guides not him who is a liar, an ingrate" (39:3). "God's curse will rest on him if he is a liar" (24:7).

There are no absolute justifications in Islam(for lying) and the Prophet has asked us to tell truth even under the harshest circumstances of oppression. However, one may choose not to tell the truth when:

a. He is under oppression and there is danger of losing his life if he told the truth. Shaykh Saadi narrates a story, "A cruel king ordered an innocent man present in his court to be killed because of his lack of manners. Hearing this, the villager started to curse the king in his native language. The king asked the prime minister, who understood that man's language, to tell him what that man was saying The wise minister, instead of telling the truth, told the king this man is sorry for his conduct, praising his greatness and asking for his mercy The king was affected and he spared the life of that innocent man." Shaykh Saadi calls this a "lie with wisdom."

b. To promote mutual relationship between spouse, i.e., if wife asks you, "Am I beautiful?" there is nothing wrong with saying "Yes," even if this is not the case.

c. While making peace between two quarreling parties, instead of igniting them against each other, i.e., "He said such and such bad thing about you," just say,"He says such and such good thing about you." Tradition: He is not a liar who tries to bring peace between two people by trying to tell the truth only as described in Surah al-Anbiya (21:62).

d. To make unbelievers realize the truth (21:62-65) When Prophet Abraham broke all the idols except the biggest one, the unbelievers entered the temple. Abraham hid and put his ax in the hand of the chief idol. They asked, "Who broke our gods?" He said, "Ask the chief idol, he has the ax." They said, "Don't you know he can't speak or do anything?" Abraham said, "That's what I have been telling you, so worship God, rather than these stones who cannot harm or profit you."

How can animal sacrifice - for whatever purpose - during Hajji be explained? What has been offered by moslem sources is that it is not to request favor, but to give thanks. I find this explanation without merit. To kill an animal for a religious purpose is a "sacrifice" regardless of the purpose

Not really seeing what the big deal is here.....I mean during Hajii the meat of the sacrifice is eaten.....<shrug>.....peace :m:

 

[lostminotaur]

Simply put, past is prologue.

so, what is your point?
tribalism = backwardness?

It's an amalgam because it contains modified elements of the three pre-cursors; Judaism, Christianity and the Arab polytheistic pantheon.

again, what is your point?

none of your points provide any merit to your argument that islam is 'bad'...

 

[Thersites]

"Bad" is an unfortunate choice of word.
More accurate criticisms of islam are that it is almost certainly not true, that it rests on contradictory and illogical bases and that it encourages its followers to behave badly to other people. Logically Epicurus's riddle is an unanswerable criticism of islam and the claims made for and about the god of islam and its behaviour are absurd and wicked in the eyes of any reasonable being not blinded by faith.

 

[marv]

I used "bad" in the sense of disfunctional as a religion in the western sense of a modern world, a point I'll be getting to.

Please be patient as things go on as there is much misunderstanding between our two worlds. I'm certainly trying to gain some edification on the issues. Each world has a degree of mistrust of the other and history demonstrates merit in this distrust. Each has invaded the other, and George Santayana advised us that if we forget history, we are doomed to repeat it. Mutual understanding and acceptance is essential.

As to tribalism as a societial structure, yes; it poses problems in a world composed of modern nation-states.

(Note to surrenderer, I'm preparing my response to your last post, and some additional questions.)

 

[marv]

...there is no seperation of church and state in Islam. No other religion(as far as I know) details how to govern politics etc in their religous doctrine like Islam does.

That single issue probably poses the greatest difficulty between Islamic states (e.g., Saudi Arabia) and the rest of the world. It abrogates the right to freedom of religion, or in my case, non-religion. For example, it is illegal to sell a Christian Bible on the streets in Saudi Arabia or openly practice Judaism. Why is that? Even Israel, with a national religion of Judaism, permits the practice of Christianity and Islam within it's borders. Given this, I cannot see how the Islamic world can ever reach a peaceful accord with the rest of the world without altering that attitude. Although many non-moslem states admit a national or preferred religion, states governed by religion have long since disappeared in the non-moslem world.

This is what the Koran (Qur'an?) says about liars ...(Qur'an, 40:28, 39:3 and 24:7)...

The differences lie in the context. I have in mind an article in the 'Islam' section of the Arab News containing the instruction that a moslem must not lie to another moslem, but that a moslem should lie to, or otherwise use deceit and deception on, an "enemy of Islam" in order to achieve "victory". For whatever reason, the article did not bother to define who an "enemy" might be. The context suggested that it would be any non-moslem. No reference was made to any document although it was a quotation. I wish that I had bookmarked that URL because statements made in a newspaper so widely respected in the moslem world are ominous and deserve explanation.

I agree that to eat the meat of a sacrificed animal is good, but since it's a religious requirement (Eid?), I still see it as "sacrificing animals". I also read that often by the time the meat reaches the poor or other intended recipient, it's spoiled and inedible. Thus, the religious act of sacrificing is satisfied, but not the charitable good that seems to be only an afterthought to justify the sacrificial act.

Now, there seems to be some conflict in the Qur'an between...

"Perfected is the Word of thy Lord in truth and justice. There is naught that can change His words."

...and...

"Nothing of our revelation (even a single verse) do we abrogate or cause be forgotten, but we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof."

This bring into question the original authoring and subsequent editing of the Qur'an by the first caliphs following the death of Mohammed. Recently, an ancient copy of the Qur'an was found in an attic space during the restoration of a mosque in Sa'ana, Yemen. At first, the German contractors doing the restoration work wanted to send the manuscript to Hamburg, Germany, so an expert in ancient Arabic languages could translate it. But this was prevented by Yemen authorities, and the manuscript was locked away. I find this to be strange. The first caliph ordered all existing copies destroyed when he authorized a "standard" version to replace the copies in existance. Perhaps one was not, and this manuscript contains differences from the caliph's authorized version.

 

[Ellimist]

As to tribalism as a societial structure, yes; it poses problems in a world composed of modern nation-states.

Does it? or do modern nation-states pose problems to tribes?

Look up Papua New Guinea and all of the tribes there. Look up Ecuador and the Huaorani.

From what I can tell, your premise for the "tribalism" argument is that our "moden nation-states" are better than tribal systems. sacarsm/ obviously because of our millions of poor and hungry and homeless compared to tribes rarely going hungry because of their small groups - of course we are better and our "modern nation-states" modern wars where millions are killed for politicians' agendas and the biggest fear of the year is not "is everyone getting fed and staying alive?" but "oh, no! the gays want to marry! Fuck no!" Goddamnit. /sarcasm

 

[surenderer]

That single issue probably poses the greatest difficulty between Islamic states (e.g., Saudi Arabia) and the rest of the world. It abrogates the right to freedom of religion, or in my case, non-religion. For example, it is illegal to sell a Christian Bible on the streets in Saudi Arabia or openly practice Judaism.

Well 1st of all Saudi practices Wahabism not traditional Islam so their rules are different than other muslim countries.....why not use Indonesia? they have more muslims and are a democracy. Non-Muslims have often enjoyed better living arangements in muslim land than anywhere else....most Jews will tell you this

The differences lie in the context. I have in mind an article in the 'Islam' section of the Arab News containing the instruction that a moslem must not lie to another moslem, but that a moslem should lie to, or otherwise use deceit and deception on, an "enemy of Islam" in order to achieve "victory". For whatever reason, the article did not bother to define who an "enemy" might be

I have already answered this question for you

Now, there seems to be some conflict in the Qur'an between......and...This bring into question the original authoring and subsequent editing of the Qur'an by the first caliphs following the death of Mohammed. Recently, an ancient copy of the Qur'an was found in an attic space during the restoration of a mosque in Sa'ana, Yemen. At first, the German contractors doing the restoration work wanted to send the manuscript to Hamburg, Germany, so an expert in ancient Arabic languages could translate it. But this was prevented by Yemen authorities, and the manuscript was locked away. I find this to be strange. The first caliph ordered all existing copies destroyed when he authorized a "standard" version to replace the copies in existance. Perhaps one was not, and this manuscript contains differences from the caliph's authorized version.[/QUOTE

I will have to check into this and get back to you....I dont answer things unless I feel qualified to do so....sorry ....peace

 

[top mosker]

I have tried on numerous occasions to have a dialogue with Christians. On each occasion, they cease communicating when the validity of their "religion" is brought up by me. I challenge any Christian to defend their "religion".

The purpose of this thread is not to slam or flame Christianity, but to point out certain characteristics I, and many others, find discordant in that particular religion.

First, Christianity is not strictly a religion, but a theistic/political/social/military movement with roots deep in ancient Germanic/Judaic tribalism and practices. Theistically, it is an amalgam of ancient Judaism and the polytheism of the ancient Arabs. Politically, it is fascism and claims the whole world (Earth) to itself exclusively while ignoring or sometimes even killing those who speak of logical hypocricies within the religion. Socially, it is male dominated and appeals mostly to uneducated and socially displaced males. Militaristically, it is aggressive and uses the term "army of god" in a very real sense with the intent of driving the "barbarian" from the face of the Earth.

"God" originated as "Yahweah" which originated as a mixture of various dieties from Persia and Egypt - (e.g. an ancient sun-god worshipped by various tribes extant on the lower Nile Valley.) In this, God parallels the Yahweh of the Jews. In the first commandment (also accepted by Christians amd Moslems), Yahweh admonished the Jews to "...have no other gods before me." In other words, neither Yahweh nor his "descendants", Jehovah and Allah, are the deities of monotheism. This commandment is the undeniable, tacit acknowledgment of other deities. So the Christians made the Holy Trinity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

All major world religions are the same. They rely on circular logic and hypocricy to confuse the masses into accepting an unnatural power structure with the rich at the top and the poor at the bottom. You should have just taken up the case against all faiths and saved yourself the trouble of explaining your xenophobic viewpoint of Islam.

As a species, maybe we should just decide to give up on the whole religion thing and put it to rest for once and all.

Anyone up for killing god?

 

[marv]

top mosker, your brand of atheism is not my brand of atheism. "Live and let live" is just fine with me.

 

[path]

Well 1st of all Saudi practices Wahabism not traditional Islam so their rules are different than other muslim countries.....why not use Indonesia? they have more muslims and are a democracy. Non-Muslims have often enjoyed better living arangements in muslim land than anywhere else....most Jews will tell you this

Surrenderer I am afraid your ideal of traditional islam is a romantic myth. If there was a true islam that when practiced led to a happy successful and progressive society then it would be in existance today, who chooses failure over success. I know you like most muslims romanticize about the glory days but the apex of islamic power and knowledge simply coincided with a rise and expansion of first the arabs then the turks. If you look at it as a strictly historic occurence then it is just like the expansionist rise of the Persians, Greeks, Celts, Romans, Germans, english etc. The difference is simply that the arabs brought with them thier new faith which is what first organized and focused the expansionist rise of the arab peoples (not saying that was bad it has happened throughout history). The glory days of islam sprung from the wealth of material and intellectual property that they absorbed during those early centuries. When the turks lost thier military impetus in the 15th century so did islam.

Peace :m:

 

[Athelwulf]

I guess I came in pretty late in the discussion, but I wanna throw this in: Pretty much all religions are equally valid. O' course, that's not saying anything positive about them.

 

[Roman]

Yeah, Muslims are fucking retarded (like most people).

I heard on NPR are that there was a film protesting violence and sexual abuse in Islam, so in repsonse to this "unjust and unclean" portrayal of Islam, Muslims protested violently.

 

[Michael]

Well 1st of all Saudi practices Wahabism not traditional Islam so their rules are different than other muslim countries.....why not use Indonesia? they have more muslims and are a democracy.

I often see Indonesia brought up as the shining example of Islam – because they had a female president and are now on their way to a decent democracy - this is somehow a wondrous reflection on Islam.

How so?

How is Indonesia an example of Islam?

Actually, as an example, Indonesia is a poor one. It certainly is far from paradise and enlightenment and has had a sordid history to say the least. Indonesia is a nation that happens to be majority Islam – however, if you think that has anything to do with they’re now present democracy and the fact that they elected a female President, you’re mistaken.

If you look into the history of Indonesia and ask yourself “why are they now a democracy?” you’ll find it has everything to do with colonization, the after effects of industrialized Japan and WWII and the eventual Western pressure on the Indonesian military-run-regime in favor of what the West hopes will be a decent Capitalistic market.

It has absolutely nothing to do with Islam.

If anything, you’ll find that Indonesians are moderate Muslims, because this is a religion from another culture, and this has allowed the Indonesians to advance past it. Whereas the ME is intimately connected with Islam historically as well as culturally.

So they can not move past it. They are stuck living with their 1400 yr old idea of government. And when the ME and N. Africa was conquered by the Europeans - most didn’t even have the amenities such as plumbing and running water that the Romans has installed 1000 years before.

Why?

Islam maintains the status quote, and justifies Tribal culture and stereotypes and is easily twisted to mean anything one wants it to me.

Islam is the pinnacle of an antiquated Religious system of governing people – which is how the ME has been run since day dot.

It’s been superseded and will never be a match for modern governmental methods. It is after all, just a blending of Arab culture/religion into Christian and Jewish evolved monotheism. And as those two religions are already about as enlightened as a burnt bulb – when using them as a basis don’t expect much.

 

[Michael]

Moon Gods were worshipped all over the ME. And one of the Arabic versions of the Moon Gods was worshipped by praying towards the city-state Mecca and was revered by walking around a square rock. Enlightenment - yeah right. This one became called Allah – and it was easy enough to convert other people to it (as they were conquered - by the sword) because many already worshipped Moon Gods anyway – hence Islam.

I believe, as a legacy, a Moon symbol tends to adorn the very top of mosques even to this day. Hell even Mosque architecture is just a reworking of a famous Byzantine church in what used to be Constantinople.

 

[Michael]

Anyway, Islam had it’s day in the sun and used to thrive.

But how?

And what happened?

The how is because the ME people (who just happened to be Islamic but could have been any religion) were united and held a strangle hold on all goods traveling between China and India to the Mediterranean and Europe. Which of course prompted the crusades and perhaps inadvertently pushed the Europeans to look for a way around the ME – leading to the eventual colonization of the entire world (minus China proper, Korea and Japan). Once the ME could no longer control the flow of goods they slowly sank into the pages of history. As has been the case ever since.

Why? Because they use an antiquated tribal based form of government which is a mixture of superstition and Arab Tribal culture/family loyalties – called Islam. This has never resulted in creating a prosperous and enlightened society ANYWHERE.

As I have asked on many occasions – if Islam is such a wondrous enlightened system to live under, the why did the Spanish finally banish it’s practice once they were able to free themselves from the Islamic system?

Why did the Greeks do the same?

Why did the Indians do the same?

One really has to wonder?

Why?

Why would the people who lived under such the great and enlightened Islamic Religion rise up to get rid of it and almost all its precepts?

Weird huh?

Why?

 

[Michael]

In the last 1400 years why hasn’t Islamic countries become such wondrous paradises?

(a fine example of this antiquated system is the use of the Qur’an as justification for Islamic Arabs selling East African slaves to the Americas)

So to the question: Why is Islam “bad?”

I would answer easily by pointing to the 1400 year old history, which can not be argued, and can attest that Islam has not advanced those civilizations one single iota. If so, show me where? How has Islam changed those places for the better? I’d say yes, it united a people, who were then able to conquer other civilizations and absorb their concepts. Yes, an Arab (that happen to be a Muslim) came up with an ingenious method of numerical notation - but that had nothing to do with “Islam” any more than calculus has something to do with “Christianity” or Geometry with “Paganism” - it was one of many ideas that people have in any society anywhere if given enough time.

So I’ll ask again: Why did Spain, India, and Greece get rid of this lovely enlightened religion called Islam?

Why didn’t Islamic nations abandon the selling of Africans into slavery? As a matter of fact – Muslim Kurds quite ruthlessly (and famously) were used by the Ottomans to crush and then sell many Arabs as slaves after they had conquered the Peninsula. So what comes around goes around.

If Islam is so great why hasn’t the ME or Indonesia or North Africa or Malaysia ever become these harmonious wondrous oh-so-enlightened societies in the last 1400 years?

History is all you need to look at - and HISTORY, not me, but HISTORY says Islam is a failure. And as they say: You can't argue with History.