Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    By definition, all Muslims consider the Quran to be the absolute and perfect word of god in its entirety, no editing or revidion allowed. Thay also consider Muhammad to be the ultimate exemplar for moral and practical behaviour.

    The fact that the majority are unaware of, or (as you said) choose to ignore the bad bits doesn't mean that the bad bits are not there. They are, and those who choose to act on them are not following some extremist or corrupted interpretation. They are simply following an interpretation.

    It is noticable that while many Muslims will condemn ISIS, they will not condemn the parts of the Quran and sunnah that ISIS use to justify their actions.
    So we live in a world of 1.6 billion poor followers of Islam, or what?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CounTolstoy)
    It seems that many people on this thread are committed to misunderstanding you.
    What Mr Levestress seems to misunderstand is the logical disconnect between the two positions:
    1. Muslims believe that the Quran is perfect, immutable and universal, and
    2. Muslims do not agree with some of the contents of the Quran.

    If those Muslims who do not believe that the ultimate aim of Allah is the universal adoption of Islam (by choice or by force) clearly stated that they consider the Quran to be flawed and requiring some revision, it would be a major step on the road towards the reformation and enlightenment of Islam. It is not an easy road (as Christianity can attest to) but it is nontheless a road that must be travelled, for the good of all.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MMM1997)
    I disagree with you . Islam does not preach hate of women because in islamic ideology a women is guaranteed heaven just for being a mother. And Muhammad is said to have said that the person you should love most after God and Muhammad is your mother, your mother, your mother and then you love your father. Three times more than the father.
    Yes, it says to respect your mother.
    But it also says that a husband may beat a disobedient wife under certain conditions.
    And there is the Quran's statements on inheritance and legal testimony inequality.
    And it describes a wife as "like a field for you to plough as and when you like".
    And there's all the stuff about how contact with women at certain times causes all sorts of problems with acceptability of prayer and the suchlike.

    It is utterly pointless, not to say dishonest, to claim that women have some kind of elevated social position in Islam, as it is clearly not the case, either theologically or practically.

    And no one claims that Islam preaches "hatred" of women. Just that it is clearly misogynistic and discriminatory.

    Tell me, can a woman pray at the front of the mosque if she wants?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by irfan98)
    Okay. What about Christianity?
    Christians don't occupy the West Bank (in fact some Palestinians are Christians and share the pain of the occupation with their fellow Muslims) and the war in Iraq wasn't made in the name of Jesus -- it was about WMD and planting the seed of democracy.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chakede)
    why would someone love mohammed before their mother and father- thats just nonesense
    Muslims do not idolise Muhammad! FACT!!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    What Mr Levestress seems to misunderstand is the logical disconnect between the two positions:
    1. Muslims believe that the Quran is perfect, immutable and universal, and
    2. Muslims do not agree with some of the contents of the Quran.

    If those Muslims who do not believe that the ultimate aim of Allah is the universal adoption of Islam (by choice or by force) clearly stated that they consider the Quran to be flawed and requiring some revision, it would be a major step on the road towards the reformation and enlightenment of Islam. It is not an easy road (as Christianity can attest to) but it is nontheless a road that must be travelled, for the good of all.
    Answer me, do we live in a world with 1.6 billion poor Muslims? Because I don't think even 0.1% of that figure actively go around killing non-believers
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Yes, it says to respect your mother.
    But it also says that a husband may beat a disobedient wife under certain conditions.
    And there is the Quran's statements on inheritance and legal testimony inequality.
    And it describes a wife as "like a field for you to plough as and when you like".
    And there's all the stuff about how contact with women at certain times causes all sorts of problems with acceptability of prayer and the suchlike.

    It is utterly pointless, not to say dishonest, to claim that women have some kind of elevated social position in Islam, as it is clearly not the case, either theologically or practically.

    And no one claims that Islam preaches "hatred" of women. Just that it is clearly misogynistic and discriminatory.

    Tell me, can a woman pray at the front of the mosque if she wants?
    Considerably if you compare them to the social position of women in 7th century.
    Getting some inheritance, allowing them to own assets and limiting the number of wifes to 4 and institutionalising alimony is far better than having none of these things.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Yes, it says to respect your mother.
    But it also says that a husband may beat a disobedient wife under certain conditions.
    And there is the Quran's statements on inheritance and legal testimony inequality.
    And it describes a wife as "like a field for you to plough as and when you like".
    And there's all the stuff about how contact with women at certain times causes all sorts of problems with acceptability of prayer and the suchlike.

    It is utterly pointless, not to say dishonest, to claim that women have some kind of elevated social position in Islam, as it is clearly not the case, either theologically or practically.

    And no one claims that Islam preaches "hatred" of women. Just that it is clearly misogynistic and discriminatory.

    Tell me, can a woman pray at the front of the mosque if she wants?
    Well said. I'm surprised that nobody said that Islam invented human rights or music.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by savonarola)
    Considerably if you compare them to the social position of women in 7th century.

    Getting some inheritance, allowing them to own assets and limiting the number of wifes to 4 and institutionalising alimony is far better than having none of these things.
    Perhaps it was a progress in the 7th century, but now, in the 21st century, Islam is completely outdated and useless regarding women's rights.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Because I don't think even 0.1% of that figure actively go around killing non-believers
    Only a slight minority would go and kill disbelievers, but many more would agree with them.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Only a slight minority would go and kill disbelievers, but many more would agree with them.
    if you want an Orwellian-style government where people are not entitled to their own opinions, I hear North Korea is rather close to the novel
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    if you want an Orwellian-style government where people are not entitled to their own opinions, I hear North Korea is rather close to the novel
    Wow. You have a gift for putting words in other people's mouth and for deflecting any answer to your weak arguments. I give you that.

    People are entitled to their opinions, but I don't have to agree with them.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    You're making the assumption that I am basing this on a few individuals.
    The number of individual Muslims who you quizzed about their attitudes and beliefs is irrelevant. You are using limited personal experience to generalise about a wider population - the very thing that you are attacking others for doing.

    You're also being an idiot for choosing the worst Muslim region and thinking thats going to give an accurate view of the whole of Islam, which you seem very eager to generalise as brutes.
    You're also being an idiot for choosing any particular Muslim community and claiming that it represents the whole.

    My statement was simply to illustrate the flaw in your argument that a small sample can be used to represent the whole. I do not believe that any particular community represents the whole. Muslims are individuals and should be judged as such, and not used as examples to generalise.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Perhaps it was a progress in the 7th century, but now, in the 21st century, Islam is completely outdated and useless regarding women's rights.
    never said that. i only mentioned it to show that the original prophets of islam were very progressive with regards to how women ought to be treated in a society. too bad this
    characteristic has been lost on the contemporary muslims.
    Momo was married to a women 20 year his elder who was an entrepreneur (lady was in import/resale of spices), that's liberal as ****, even by today's standards
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    The Quran is open to interpretation, 1.6 billion Muslims evidently don't follow these things, so it is a human decision whether or not to carry out these acts
    Exactly. Just because a group interprets passages literally does not mean that their interpretation is wrong. In fact, taking a passage literally, without interpretation, is not "interpretation". It is simply accepting that an omnipotent, omniscient god said what he meant and meant what he said.

    isn't it blatant that extremists exploit the vagueness to justify their actions?
    Except that often the passage is not vague.
    "Fight the disbelievers until there is no more idolatry and all religion is for Allah" is not at all vague. It is quite explicit that there is and action to be taken against a group until a set objective is achieved.

    or are 1.6 billion people not true Muslims? I'm not sure
    It depends who you ask. Each sect will accuse the others of being "not true Muslims" and when you tot it all up (as well as taking into account that people who convert for reasons other than a genuine belief in the truth of Islam are "not true Muslims"), there are very few "true Muslims".

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Equally, their forms of communism and nazism were crystal clear in their views. So it balances out.
    You've lost me there.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    So we live in a world of 1.6 billion poor followers of Islam, or what?
    If you mean that the vast majority of Muslims either cherry-pick, or are fed a cherry-picked version of Islam to suit a particular agenda - then yes, you would be correct.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by savonarola)
    Considerably if you compare them to the social position of women in 7th century.
    Getting some inheritance, allowing them to own assets and limiting the number of wifes to 4 and institutionalising alimony is far better than having none of these things.
    And yet, women were able to hold poitions of influence, manage their own affairs, and inherit familiy wealth in pre-Islamic Arabia (see Khadija, Muhammad's first wife).
    Something doesn't add up.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Well said. I'm surprised that nobody said that Islam invented human rights or music.
    The sun is Muslim!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    if you want an Orwellian-style government where people are not entitled to their own opinions, I hear North Korea is rather close to the novel
    I absolutely support the right for people to hold opinions and beliefs. I equally support the right for those opinions and beliefs to be criticised and ridiculed without mercy.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 23, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.