Our attitude concerning mockery of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
- Thread starter tresbien
- Start date
Wow Arsalan that was a big responce 
I was going to write a little about Venetian merchant ships (trade is the main reason for progress not superstituous beleif), I was going to write about Opera and Ballet and how it is absurd to suggest either was developed because of Islam, I was going to post paintings from Augustus tomb and compare with paintings of Mohammad (they were both religous icons)to demonstate how European painting was not based on Islam or even ME stylistic painting (this goes back to Venice) anyway, I was toying with the ideas of Mathmatical proof, the Archimedian concept of limit, the Chinese endevors into integral calculus.
It was then I thought about the way in which many Chinese think of Japanese.
Many Chinese just need to think that Japan is only successful beause of China. It doesn't matter if we're talking Bonzai tree or Blue ray laser - every single thing Japan has accomplished is directly traced to China (in their mind). Why is that? Its because China was bitch slapped by Japan and then to pour salt in the wound the Japanese went on to supercede the Chinese in all endevours leaving the Chinese a third world third rate backwater. So, with nothing in the last 100 years to be proud of, they just latch onto Japan and turn the Japanese accomplishments in "Chinese" accomplishments. (I know, seems convoluted but hey thats the way it is and I know a LOT of Chinese from all walks a life, this may be a stereotype but I assure you its accurate).
I see now why modern Muslims think that because Jewish and Xian monks living in Islamic countries translate neo-Greek literature into Arabic and somehow is this means "Islam" gets a bit of credit for European Opera. It makes as much sense. One would think at the very least the credit would go to the neo-Greeks whose work was translated into Arabic. But no thats no good - it must be "Islam".
You want to think Muslims invented zero or "Islam" put a man on the moon. Well, go for it. Why it was Xian countries (and not Islamic countries) that received the wonderousness of Islam is a paradox easily ignored.
*seseame street tune*
Which one is not like the other .. which one of these doesn't belong:
- Greek Golden Age
- Roman Golden Age
- Persian Golden Age
- Chinese Golden Age
- Mayan Golden Age
- Islam Golden Age
I suppose being raised Amercian I never had that limpish-envious feeling. It's also (and maybe therefor) easy for me to be atheist ... I don't need a religon to make me feel proud - just being born American we are naturally innoculated to feel a sense of American accomplishment based on personal endevour. I suppose when Islamic countries are being left in the dust and yet your taught Islamic Golden Age well then, Islam put a man on the moon and we can all thank the Chinese for the Japanese PS3.
I was going to write a little about Venetian merchant ships (trade is the main reason for progress not superstituous beleif), I was going to write about Opera and Ballet and how it is absurd to suggest either was developed because of Islam, I was going to post paintings from Augustus tomb and compare with paintings of Mohammad (they were both religous icons)to demonstate how European painting was not based on Islam or even ME stylistic painting (this goes back to Venice) anyway, I was toying with the ideas of Mathmatical proof, the Archimedian concept of limit, the Chinese endevors into integral calculus.
It was then I thought about the way in which many Chinese think of Japanese.
Many Chinese just need to think that Japan is only successful beause of China. It doesn't matter if we're talking Bonzai tree or Blue ray laser - every single thing Japan has accomplished is directly traced to China (in their mind). Why is that? Its because China was bitch slapped by Japan and then to pour salt in the wound the Japanese went on to supercede the Chinese in all endevours leaving the Chinese a third world third rate backwater. So, with nothing in the last 100 years to be proud of, they just latch onto Japan and turn the Japanese accomplishments in "Chinese" accomplishments. (I know, seems convoluted but hey thats the way it is and I know a LOT of Chinese from all walks a life, this may be a stereotype but I assure you its accurate).
I see now why modern Muslims think that because Jewish and Xian monks living in Islamic countries translate neo-Greek literature into Arabic and somehow is this means "Islam" gets a bit of credit for European Opera. It makes as much sense. One would think at the very least the credit would go to the neo-Greeks whose work was translated into Arabic. But no thats no good - it must be "Islam".
You want to think Muslims invented zero or "Islam" put a man on the moon. Well, go for it. Why it was Xian countries (and not Islamic countries) that received the wonderousness of Islam is a paradox easily ignored.
*seseame street tune*
Which one is not like the other .. which one of these doesn't belong:
- Greek Golden Age
- Roman Golden Age
- Persian Golden Age
- Chinese Golden Age
- Mayan Golden Age
- Islam Golden Age
I suppose being raised Amercian I never had that limpish-envious feeling. It's also (and maybe therefor) easy for me to be atheist ... I don't need a religon to make me feel proud - just being born American we are naturally innoculated to feel a sense of American accomplishment based on personal endevour. I suppose when Islamic countries are being left in the dust and yet your taught Islamic Golden Age well then, Islam put a man on the moon and we can all thank the Chinese for the Japanese PS3.
Here's a start:
History and Nature of Secularization and Secularism
After the Thirty Years War in 1648 [secularism] came to mean the transfer of church lands to states. Christian Churches were huge landowners, and religious institutions in non-Christian countries also held or controlled very large properties, which states increasingly secularized. In England Henry VIII's dissolution of monasteries was a secularizing step. Secularization over time came rather to refer primarily to a process in which religious influence over government, institutions, ideas, and behavior is reduced and reliance on this-worldly bases for these spheres grows.
Secularims developed directly from strong wealthy city-states in Western Europe. If you can find some proof that Islam's explusion from Spain spurred on secularism in Europe I'd be happy to read it.
You could read on the influence of Ibn Rushd on Western thought.
Like a country based on genocide and sustained by supporting dictators, death squads, with the dubious distinction of being the only people to use nuclear weapons on civilians while simulataneously using unfair trade practices to drive fledgling economies into starvation and civil war? And currently occupying two countries it has destroyed for flimsy reasons.
I'd call most Americans oblivious or clueless. Heres a quiz for you:
Q:what happens when America has an internal crisis
1. It looks for solutions logically and reasonably, OR
2. it destabilises or invades some country without the ability to defend itself.
Last edited:
Oh please. Like they've bothered. The initial proliferation of prayer breakfasts and the like in W's administration - including his cabinet - was kept out of the mainstream press, but was a matter of concern for those of us who see overt theistic ritual as a prelliminary to serious political malfeasance. That's a lot of trouble, and out of the spotlight too, for a bunch of atheists to go through just for appearance's sake.SAM said:
And definitely not militant atheists, eh? And why not ? Because militant atheists can't sucker the theistically groomed and obdurate. They make opponents of them, not victims.
Yes it does. What you said about the essence of secular government was wrong. You are misusing the word.Arsalan said:
It's an English word for a definite concept. If people in the East don't have the concept, or the word, so be it.Arsalan said:
By the evidence, few Muslims have a concept of "secularism", and just take the word to refer to anything that isn't a theocracy and some things that are, if they are tolerant of more than one religion. And so "democracy" also presents problems, since under it people can vote against religious rules they don't like for any reason, however theologically unsound.Arsalan said:
If these conflicts are hard for current ME people to see, their vision may improve as they begin to actually attempt secular, democratic government.
nice post.
LIAR! It was you that brought up, and used the label 'Hinduism' not I! You then dishonestly mispelled the term so as to denigrate it, and try and pin such denigration on me, and failed. Any aggregation of ideologies was also brought into this thread by you, using your terminology, not mine! LIAR! Dishonest LIAR! You tried to make a point, and failed, and then accuse me of being ignorant of a disparate and contradictory set of philosophies that YOU lumped together under one term!
Building straw men is an ignorant, dishonest and fallacious debating tactic.
You mentioned the contradiction and hypocrisy within the label you chose to use, not I. You're trying to set me up, and are failing, because your traps aren't clever, because you are so blinded by your bigotry and hatred. You are the racist, throwing labels around, you are the bigot, you are the tight little knot of hatred. So much for religion making people better people.
I quoted the text for the Hindu philosophies if you care to go back and read it
Did you even read it? I wonder.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=77793&page=35
Did you even read it? I wonder.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=77793&page=35
I quoted the text for the Hindu philosophies if you care to go back and read it
Did you even read it? I wonder.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=77793&page=35
No I didn't read it, because it didn't need to be read. No reading material supplied by you is going to excuse the Oxymoron you are guilty of, none.
Links to quirky contradictory philosophies does not excuse this; you twist words to suit your warped agenda.
Now, debate honestly, if you are capable.
I used to get students like this while TA'ing.
Did not read anything, but did everyone a big favor by attending the discussion.
Not worth my (vast free) time, considering the above.
You mean it's not worth our time to read your vast fabrications.
BLAH BLAH BLAH. Clearly you don't read what I write, let alone link to.
You used an oxymoron. You twisted words to suit your dishonest agenda. You are a twister and a liar, and no amount of linked material is going to change that.
Which is your belief and thats fine.Wow Arsalan that was a big responce
I was going to write a little about Venetian merchant ships (trade is the main reason for progress not superstituous beleif)
I never said any of those things were created by the Muslims, now did I?
Please go into it, don’t let me stop you.
And the only culture in the world you obviously know something about since you always keep going on about it.
First of all, I never mentioned Opera.
And second of all, not all was translated by non-Muslims. But then the question remains as to why they could not do this in the non-Muslim countries and had to travel for ages to go and study in Muslim countries at Muslim universities and learn from Muslim scholars.
Thirdly, translating something does not mean that you have contributed anything. It was the extensive commentaries written on many of the ancient Greek literature by the Muslim scholars, thinkers and philosophers which are deserving of praise and recognition and which formed the basis of future Western understanding and thought of these works, after they were, once again, translated from the Arabic, and not the Greek.
I never said any of those things, but don’t let that stop you. And the Christian countries got that knowledge after the Muslims were kicked out of Europe. Till that moment, Europe was pretty much a barbaric society in some terms. Yes, there were some bright spots here and there, but not as much as there were in the Muslim world.
Do not take me saying that Muslims invented and or introduced a lot of things into Western culture as me being envious, no it is indeed not envy. I am proud that Muslim history does not just contain what the anti-Islamists wish to put in it. I am proud to be a brother of those great inventors and scientists who believed the same as me and did wondrous things. Just like you, I’m sure, are proud of many great achievements of the Americans.
Being proud of the history of your religion and the people who believed the same as you is not the same as wanting to be part of something just for the sake of pride. I am not a Muslim to feel some kind of pride about Muslim history neither do I defend the contributions of the Muslims to the progress of the West just so I can feel proud. Just wanting to be religious to be able to be proud or feel some kind of pride for no other reason is foolishness.
Now you say that you are somehow inoculated to feeling a sense of American pride because of personal endeavour. Well, since all these Muslim contributions to the West are not my personal endeavour, I don’t see the connection. But I do challenge your statement that Americans don’t feel a sense of pride when they think about all the great things their country and countrymen have done. You personally may be immune to rightful pride, but that doesn’t mean that other Americans are not proud of their country or of their countrymen and their achievements. I challenge you to prove this statement of yours.
First of all, I am not getting any education here about the Islamic Golden Age. In fact, just about the only education I got about Islam going to school in Holland was that mosques were and are places where lovers meet and that Muslim women must be circumcised. I had to educate myself on my religion after being spat on the streets after 9/11 just for looking like a Muslimto know that what I was taught was wrong. So no, no institution has educated me in the Islamic Golden Age.
Secondly, I never mentioned that these contributions to science and various other fields by the Muslims are taking place right now. As you have been referring to the Islamic Golden Age, I had hoped you would know the timeline of that particular period. What I am saying is that there have been a shedload of Muslim thinkers, philosophers, scientists, inventors, mathematicians etc. during the Islamic Golden Age whose contributions to various fields deservre recognition and praise or, in the least, some kind of acknowledgement.
You see, you are wrong when you think that Muslims are somehow desperate to cling onto some long forgotten past. We are not. This is merely a reaction to the image shoved down peoples throats about Muslims and Islam, namely that of Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, bombs, terrorists, ignorance etc. etc. When you start accusing Muslims of being terrorists and following a terrorist and saying that Muslims have never done anything for mankind except kill people and create disorder and chaos in the lands, then it is only natural for Muslims to research their history. And after researching their history Muslims are entitled to be proud to know that Muslims have indeed contributed greatly to civilization and progress, in various fields and in various countries, from China to England. Why should you be able to keep associating us with Bin Laden and we shouldn’t be able to associate ourselves with people like ibn Haytham?
And then we get that other excuse “Its not because of Islam those people contributed, they just did what they had to do”. But when we say that the same then applies to the “terrorists”, that they are not doing it for Islam but because of various other reasons, we are labelled ignorant of the situation, all the while my challenge still remains, well, unchallenged
It is these double standards which annoy us. It is not envy.
Im not saying that secularism as we know it now was entirely because of the Muslims. That would be foolish and would ignore history. Aguably one of the greatest contributors to the secularization of Europe was Cosimo. But the way he did is where Muslims come in. It was Muslim teaching, Muslim commentaries on various literature, Muslim science and thinking and setup of a state which was part of Cosimo’s major contribution to the secularization of Europe. Also, people and rulers were getting more and more disenfranchised with the Church.
Why is it wrong? According to WordNet essence is:
Ill copy and paste what was posted earlier:
I am not misusing the word secularism. Neither am I talking about the definition of the word. I’m talking about the essence of a secular government and absolute justice, regardless of religion wherever possible, is at the core of secularisation, not a hatred of religion. If religion can practise those teachings, then it will have, in essence, the same core as secular rule. And secularism was only a small part of what I posted.
Yes, well I wasn’t talking about any current Muslim countries, now was I? The same can be said about most Western democracies. They don’t have as their foundation the Greek thinking about democracy, no, its the American thinking of “government of the
people, by the people, for the people” which forms the foundation of most Western democracies. And even then, it can be argued that there aren’t any real total democracies left.
And yet, the Quran tells Muslim leaders to take votes and rule with consent. Whoda thunk it?
This was already the case at the start of Islam. Unfortunately, religious idiots, which are always present in any religion or ideology, are now in power supported by world superpowers. We only have to look at what they did to Mossadeq to see that it’s not all the fault of the Muslim subjects of these countries. Or what about Hamas being democratically elected and then the US and Israel supplying Fatah with weapons and ammo to wage a civil war in an attempt to destroy Hamas?
No argument there. I think most everyone has reconciled themsleves to the semi-permanent loss of the possibility of secular government in Iraq and Iran, anyway.SAM said:
Secularity in governance has to do with the absence of religious control or authority in government, the non-presence of formal religion in governing institutions, the proscription of religious rule and edict from the law as enforced by governmental coercion.arsalan said:
It has little to do with justice, or with hatred for religion.
It's just the meaning of the word, is all. It's not a compliment. There have been unjust, miserable, oppressive secular governments.
ARSALAN
Here u are a documentary by BBC on Islamic History of Europe
www.muslimheritage.com/topics/default.cfm?ArticleID=891
Here u are a documentary by BBC on Islamic History of Europe
www.muslimheritage.com/topics/default.cfm?ArticleID=891
Does that article also answer why your lil prophet wrote a book that's so stupid that everyone reads it as he likes to understand it?
WHAT BOOK DO U MEAN? SIR