Originally posted by iPosterBut is seems like Islam is the one religion easily interpreted to be a violent, vengeful one. If that quote is misinterpreted, along with the many others along the same vein, what is the correct interpretation of it?
Basically, am I an ignorant racist who thinks all Muslims should be dragged behind a pickup or shot? Not at all, but I do think Islam, as it is presently interpreted by many, is a 'broken' religion...yes.
BTW, I would like to know what you think of this site? Not as biased as the other one mentioned.
Well, firstly I should apologise for my earlier prejudging of you and assuming you had some agenda. So...apologies.
Re the first point: Islam can
be portrayed as the negative things you say - and guess what, it's right-wing fundamentalist Christians who are doing it.
That is to say: they have an active campaign to spread negative (and false) propaganda.
Why should this be ? Why are they so intolerant ? Islam accepts Christianity and Judaism. You won't find such propaganda from the Islamic side - not against the religion itself.
So, no - Islam is not 'broken'. It is portrayed as that by people who have a mission to do so. That's not to say there aren't some 'nutters' in Islam or equivalents of the fundies but we are talking about the religious doctrine when we say Islam - otherwise we must say Muslims, and 'some' Muslims at that.
This second site is a bit better - still biased though but we can work with it
Firstly - we can discount Khomenei. Shi'i Islam is a schismatic sect that represents less than 5% (possibly a bit more) of Islam. It is heterodox and even within it
Khomenei is more or less acknowledged as a deranged maniac - which he was.
Using him as 'evidence' for their argument is not only lame it shows a lack of other avenues of attack and little knowledge of what Islam actually is.
The quotes -let's take a few:
There shall be no compulsion in religion.
This one blows their whole argument out of the water ! The first one !
Fight for the sake of God those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love the aggressors.
What's the problem with this ?
The 'kill them where you find them' lines following are out of context - they were addressed in a full-on war situation.
As to the quotes at the bottom from people claiming the Qur'an is a rehash of Hagarene texts - this is really a joke. It misses the point entirely - it is not a question of whether the Qur'an is from God or Muhammad, it is a work of art. It is never viewed in this way for 2 reasons:
1) the west cannot evaluate it as such because they do not use Arabic
2) the Muslims in general have played this down because of the legalistic aspects of the Qur'an which are (to them) more important.
But it revolves just the same - literary scholars are unanimous taht it is an epic poem and one of the world's masterpieces of poetic expression (content aside). Whoever wrote it was a literary genius and as such it is hardly likely to be a compendium of past pre-Islamic juridical texts.
This site is biased unfortunately, in fact, most of the people who create sites such as this are really non-thinkers rather than those who have an agenda (though they exist too unfortunately) - if they were scholars or wanted the truth of the matter they would have found all this out for themselves. But they don't care.
One more thing: 'unbelievers' in Arabic (and 'infidels' if you must) refer very specifically
to people who do not believe in God. You would be classed as one for example.
The term does not, cannot and never has applied to people who hold a religious belief. The Qur'an is quite explicit that Jews and Christians (some of them - just like only some Muslims) will go to 'heaven'. Jews and Christians are believers. Unbelievers are atheists.
Similarly, idolaters are idol-worshippers of a specific kind - basically the Meccan cult of Muhammad's time.
I find it strange that it is the rabid fundie Xians who hate Islam so much (just like they hate gays and God knows what else) - Islam has always been accepting of Judaism and Christianity (in the sense it accepts them as TRUE), I need to say that again actually: Islam accepts Judaism and Christianity as true religions.
Muhammad learned all his religious teaching from Christians before his foundation of Islam at age 40. That's 20 years of hanging out and talking to Christian monks before he himself taught a thing.
Of course they were real Christians in that instance and unfortunately they would also be labeled as heretics or 'evil sinners' by the current crop, bit like Jesus himself really.