Kadark - your response is: I really really really really do beleive in God and I really really really do believe that Mohammad was special to this God.
Of course this is what I believe, but it is also the answer to your question. To be a genuine Muslim, you must profess the shahadah and make distinction between the role of Allah, and the role of His messengers.
There is no argument - yes I agree you really do beleive that's the case. But, that being the case I wonder what you would think if you saw a lot of people that really really really did beleive in Lrrr of the Planet Omicron Persei 8? Because you may not know it, and you may not beleive it, but there as much evidence for Lrrr as there is that Mohammad was a Prophet to a God - which is to say ZERO, ZILCH, NADDA.
That’s fine, Michael. There is no enforcement of religion upon anyone, as that would be insincere. If Islam is the path I (or a billion and a half others) chose to select, then that is my choice; likewise, others are free to believe any other prophet without ostrasization. As the verse has been quoted time and again, “To you be your way, and to me be mine”.
So what to do?
Well we could go in circles...
Or.... one would expect that if there was a really God and a real messenger - that the message would be special. But it's not special to anyone that is not Muslim. Unlike Plato or Aristotle or Kent, whose ideas and wittings are indeed revered by people from secular modern day Chinese to Muslims living in Malaysia, the Qur'an simply doens't have that appeal. Ask you're self Why Kadark?
Why does Islam have to be a special way of life? This is a common misunderstanding, and I can’t say I blame you for regurgitating this lame argument. Islam is a practical, simple way of life; it reiterates the religions of Abraham that came before it. At this point, with your thoughtless referral to entire nations, I can safely say you are unfairly generalizing and stereotyping on a massive level. China has a large (and growing) Muslim population, and some nations near it (Indonesia, for example) have enormous Muslim populations. Besides, using this dull logic, I could simply reverse the situation upon you and your lack of belief: why does atheism have very little appeal worldwide? Considering only a minute (being generous) percent of the human population would ascribe themselves as atheists, what is it about a lack of belief that is so repulsive to the overwhelming majority of mankind? Ask yourself why, Michael.
Why is it that the most perfect book ever is not appreciated by the majority of people - outside of Islam. And honestly, if it's perfect then why Kadark, do Muslims that become Atheist think it's not worth the paper it's written on? Why? It seems even an atheist, if logical, WILL HAVE TO agree to the tenets if the arguments are well made. One could only imagine a Book with GOD as the author would match Aristotle - but it doesn't.
There are a lot of ways to tackle your proposition, Michael. I could do it in sheer numbers, global influence, and/or modern day application. There are many more Muslims than those revered by the writings of Aristotle; Muhammad, Allah’s messenger, is arguably the most influential man is history, easily surpassing Aristotle (see Michael Hart’s [non-Muslim] list). Also, how many non-Muslims worldwide have actually read the Qur’an and have made a concerted effort to discover the religion’s teachings? In all likelihood, very few. Even the people today who know of Islam and criticize/reject it cannot say with complete honesty that they’ve read the book from cover to cover. I may be generalizing myself here, but what are the chances that most people today who disagree/insult Islam only read hate sites and nitpick at out-of-context verses? Where is the objectivity in that, Michael? It is only logical to me that if everyone was given a formal teaching of the religion, the Islamic population would be substantially greater.
I asked those Japaneses (well it may as well have just been Toshi). And from his reading of this translation the Sura9 passage instructed people to commit murder. It doesn't just talk about people who committed murder for God (like the Bible or Torah) it tells people to actually go out and kill other people. This is what he called "extreme version of Bible". This was his reading, I didn't do anything other than ask him to read it and tell me what it says.
Well, it’s a shame Toshi was only given a few isolated verses of a single Surah with no background information or contextual understanding. Perhaps if you enlightened Toshi on the Surah’s revelation (as in timing), along with the actual environment/setting at the time, perhaps he would change is opinion. It’s remarkable how you can shape a person’s view on such a large religion on the basis of a few singled-out verses. What you’re doing isn’t fair to Islam as a religion, nor to Toshi as a person, along with the uneducated people Toshi socializes with (and whose minds he influences).
So sure Kadark you may really really really really really beleive in God but that doesn't change the fact that people are killing other people because they really really really think the Qur'an is telling them to really really really go kill people for NOT really really really believing the Qur'an.
This is more of a political argument, but I’m willing to indulge. Under the assumption that we’re referring to modern day happenings, what events, I ask you, correspond with Muslims killing in the name of religion? The hotspots for Muslim violence are Palestine and Iraq, yet it doesn’t take the sharpest knife in the drawer to realize these particular hostilities are not due to religion, but rather land/governmental/foreign-intervention related conflict. There may be an iota of Muslims who kill for religion, although they obviously don’t reflect the majority with their dysfunctional and uncommon characteristics.
Again for thr sake of a circle:
Academically Communism works great.
Practically Communism is an utter failure.
Who is to blame - the system or the people?
There are some immediate flaws I see with this “argument”, one being that communism is a specific system of state, whereas Islam is first and foremost a religion. Along with that, Islam is not of communist nature, completely blowing out the fire (assuming ever existent) of your illogical argument. You have tried this in the past, Michael, and it really hasn’t solved anything: you cannot compare communism to Islam.
You opt for people - well fine, I can't logically argue with your opinion as it's just that - an opinion.
As is yours.
Logically which is more perfect a Book that inspires all that read it to adhere to peace or a Book that inspires some people to commit murder in it's name?
This is under the erroneous assumption that the Qur’an inspires its adherents to commit murder in its name. If you can find such a verse, immediately notify me. Let me predict (no, I’m not a psychic): you’re going to quote Surah 9, right? Before you quote isolated verses from a Surah, please ensure me that you will read the whole Surah (not just a single or few verses), and you will study (at least to some degree) the background. What predicament did Muhammad and Islam’s followers face during the revelation? What injustices had been committed beforehand? These are just some guidelines to consider when you study the inspiration of a Surah.
Which? Assuming God can make both books: Which is more perfect? Of course you'll pick the latter, but one would think the former would be more Perfect - that is if you like the idea of peace.
Again, you are referring to the Qur’an as a book that demands the killing of disbelievers in its name. This is not so. How many times must you read [109:6] to comprehend its message and teachings?
So where do we go? back to - opt for blaming the people - they misinterpret. Well fine, I can't logically argue with an opinion as it's just that - an opinion. Funny that the Japanese guy got that EXACT SAME misinterpretation? Don't you agree.
It would certainly be funny if it weren’t so deceptive. Since your Japanese friend is seemingly clueless (perhaps in a vegetative state, from my readings), I cannot take his judgement on Islam (well, anything for that matter) with any merit. As I’ve said to you, I will say directly to your friend: educate yourself on more than a lone verse. Instead of working your way from the Surah outward, focus on the broader issues first and then work your way through the individual verses. Teach your friend about Islam first - you know, the basics (such as the five pillars). Afterwards, read the Qur’an, and before starting each Surah, briefly go over a summary on its timing and setting. Then, after you’ve made the effort to truly educate yourself on Islam in a neutral fashion, I will listen carefully to your criticisms. Until then, your friend’s view on Islam is simply an opinion, and as we all know, opinions are formed from facts. If you don’t know the facts, then there’s no basis to your opinion. Also, as a side note, your using of friends to further your argument is not very legitimate. For argument’s sake, I could create a few imaginary friends, claiming they were atheist until I gave them the Qur’an to read. As you can see, such tests are ridiculously flawed and laughable when (attempted to be) used as evidence.
We demonstrated that art and math and science slows, stagnates and eventually comes to a grinding halt under any religious theocracy. Including Xiantiy including Islam including Buddhism etc... but no no no Michael, Islam is "perfect" ergo it's the people's fault again. Or better yet, who needs some art?!?!??! CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT LAST STATEMENT??? Whio needs so art?
This truly is desperation, Michael. Mocking me, using deflated, countered arguments as if they’re original - what’s new with you? Not much, it seems. Read the flourishing of math and sciences (upon many other subjects) under the Abbasids. You are taught to believe that only secularism encourages and produces results in the different fields of knowledge, whereas religion stagnates such subjects. The reality is quite contrary to this, and one need look no further than a history book, the comments of historians, or anything else of that nature. Go and find out where our modern scientific endeavours and methods originated from, before making such unsupported, asinine comments in the foreseeable future.
