What should a British Muslim do?

[Plain Talker 11]

Unless they haven't been slaughtered because they don't have a capability or numbers to do it yet, the fact that it is written down in a book they revere is enough to justify being intolerant of them as a group.

 

Absolute egregious and rabble rousing claptrap.

[MikeFrank 10]

I don't get the all Muslim's are in some way supportive of terrorism... it doesn't ring true to many I have met... Most are more concerned with their kids education and paying the bills... they are very family orientated, why would they want their kids to die or even leave home? Anyone who has kids will know the torment a parent goes through when a child is late home or unaccounted for... why on earth would they in some way encourage the separation from their kids..?

[Plain Talker 11]

I judge the followers of Islam based on the actions of the man and the words in the book that they revere, there as to be something wrong in someones head if they think Mohammad is the best example of humanity and lead their life according to the words of intolerance and violence that are found in a book written over a thousand years ago. Having said that I think a significant number of Muslims?? worldwide would renounce the religion if not for the threats of violence against them for doing so.

 

---------- Post added 17-06-2015 at 21:10 ----------

 

 

Would you describe the members of ISIS as Muslim or Moslem.

You need to get a dictionary and look at, and understand the words exegesis and hermeneutics.

 

You need to have an appreciation of the times in which the Prophet Mohamed lived.

We don't tend to describe Churchill as bloodthirsty, or as a warmongerer, because we know the facts of the times, in which he lived, and have an understanding of the necessities which drove his decisions.

 

Mohamed lived in similarly war torn times, with constant threats to the lives of himself and his followers.

The sayings (certain of which are rolled out with ball aching, hollow-headed, and contextless regularity) have to be read with an awareness of the times. His actions were that of many leaders of his calibre and of his era.

[loraward 10]

You need to get a dictionary and look at, and understand the words exegesis and hermeneutics.

 

You need to have an appreciation of the times in which the Prophet Mohamed lived.

We don't tend to describe Churchill as bloodthirsty, or as a warmongerer, because we know the facts of the times, in which he lived, and have an understanding of the necessities which drove his decisions.

 

Mohamed lived in similarly war torn times, with constant threats to the lives of himself and his followers.

The sayings (certain of which are rolled out with ball aching, hollow-headed, and contextless regularity) have to be read with an awareness of the times. His actions were that of many leaders of his calibre and of his era.

 

If as is claimed the Quran is the word of God and God created me, then God would have surely created me with the ability to understand the words in the Quran.

 

There was many very peaceful people around at the time Mohammad was waging war to further his goals, he instigated the wars and why would a man want followers.

 

The Quran is apparently the word of God, God would have known the future and would have given instruction for the future.

 

Why is it OK to ignore some parts of the Quran but not other parts, which revelation tells you which pits to ignore. For instance, eating pork is perfectly safe today but wasn't so safe in Mohammad's time, its understandable that he would tell people not to eat it, but its not understandable that Muslims still don't eat it, unless the Quron as to be obeyed for all time, in which case why isn't it all obeyed.

Edited June 18, 2015 by loraward

[Plain Talker 11]

If as is claimed the Quran is the word of God and God created me, then God would have surely created me with the ability to understand the words in the Quran.

 

There was many very peaceful people around at the time Mohammad was waging war to further his goals, he instigated the wars and why would a man want followers.

 

The Quran is apparently the word of God, God would have known the future and would have given instruction for the future.

 

Why is it OK to ignore some parts of the Quran but not other parts, which revelation tells you which pits to ignore. For instance, eating pork is perfectly safe today but wasn't so safe in Mohammad's time, its understandable that he would tell people not to eat it, but its not understandable that Muslims still don't eat it, unless the Quron as to be obeyed for all time, in which case why isn't it all obeyed.

 

Eating pork still isn't "perfectly safe", actually. It still can contain worms and other parasites that are harmful.

Yes the edicts from the times of our forefathers were sensible, and logical, when you consider that raising swine is heavier on resources like feed and water, than, say raising cattle or sheep, and pork goes off quicker, (a lot of this sort of stuff makes sense, when you look at it, such as cleanliness- washing before food, the levitical laws relating to mildew and damp in properties, and pulling such properties down and burning the infected wood.)

 

We are given intellect (well, some of us are!) And in these days of science and knowledge can decide for ourselves what rules are appropriate to be kept.

Edited June 18, 2015 by Plain Talker

[Zamo 10]

I don't get the all Muslim's are in some way supportive of terrorism... it doesn't ring true to many I have met... Most are more concerned with their kids education and paying the bills... they are very family orientated, why would they want their kids to die or even leave home? Anyone who has kids will know the torment a parent goes through when a child is late home or unaccounted for... why on earth would they in some way encourage the separation from their kids..?

 

I don't suppose the parents of the 17 year old who recently blew himself up in Iraq wanted or anticipated that as his future but, intentional or not, it is the future they gifted him through their nurturing.

 

Islamic culture produces a disproportionate level of extremism and as such those who support and perpetuate it have responsibility for it. Muslims need to take a long hard look at themselves and ask why so many of their young embrace extremism. They need to do this for the sake of their children and for the sake of their own place in British society.

[loraward 10]

Eating pork still isn't "perfectly safe", actually. It still can contain worms and other parasites that are harmful.

Yes the edicts from the times of our forefathers were sensible, and logical, when you consider that raising swine is heavier on resources like feed and water, than, say raising cattle or sheep, and pork goes off quicker, (a lot of this sort of stuff makes sense, when you look at it, such as cleanliness- washing before food, the levitical laws relating to mildew and damp in properties, and pulling such properties down and burning the infected wood.)

It made sense for the time, but now we have fridges, freezers and temperature controlled ovens, its perfectly safe to eat, easy to cook and good for you.

 

We are given intellect (well, some of us are!) And in these days of science and knowledge can decide for ourselves what rules are appropriate to be kept.

 

If humans were given the intellect to choose the bits to obey or disobey, what was the point of the book.

So you can choose which of Gods rules you can disobey and which you must obey, and when and how did God tell you this, why would God give you the intellect to choose when to display him, but give me the intellect to to see through the facade that is religion.

[the_bloke 17]

We are given intellect (well, some of us are!) And in these days of science and knowledge can decide for ourselves what rules are appropriate to be kept.

 

I asked this back in post #144 in reply to Mafya but didn't get a reply:

 

'Then should we consider those who take the passages in the Qur'an - all of them, or at least those that promote violence above those that promote love - to extremes, to be mentally incapable of taking them in the context they were written?'

 

I'm not trying to troll, it's a genuine question. I'm sure if I killed someone in the name of God without any remorse I'd be consigned to an institution.

[Halibut 12]

It made sense for the time, but now we have fridges, freezers and temperature controlled ovens, its perfectly safe to eat, easy to cook and good for you.

 

In this response, you display a reasonably well thought out approach to a point.

 

If humans were given the intellect to choose the bits to obey or disobey, what was the point of the book.

So you can choose which of Gods rules you can disobey and which you must obey, and when and how did God tell you this, why would God give you the intellect to choose when to display him, but give me the intellect to to see through the facade that is religion.

 

And in this one, you come across as staggeringly naive and ill educated.

[Plain Talker 11]

It made sense for the time, but now we have fridges, freezers and temperature controlled ovens, its perfectly safe to eat, easy to cook and good for you.

 

 

If humans were given the intellect to choose the bits to obey or disobey, what was the point of the book.

So you can choose which of Gods rules you can disobey and which you must obey, and when and how did God tell you this, why would God give you the intellect to choose when to display him, but give me the intellect to to see through the facade that is religion.

 

Because He made (presumably) sentient beings who are (hopefully/normally) capable of rational thinking, not automata.

 

We have the intellect and the freedom to rationalise our concept of God into a belief for or against His existence. We use our experiences to work out which way our belief lays.

 

 

---------- Post added 18-06-2015 at 22:52 ----------

 

I asked this back in post #144 in reply to Mafya but didn't get a reply:

 

'Then should we consider those who take the passages in the Qur'an - all of them, or at least those that promote violence above those that promote love - to extremes, to be mentally incapable of taking them in the context they were written?'

 

I'm not trying to troll, it's a genuine question. I'm sure if I killed someone in the name of God without any remorse I'd be consigned to an institution.

 

To which I have suggested an answer. Does it actually matter who answered?

Edited June 18, 2015 by Plain Talker

[loraward 10]

Because He made (presumably) sentient beings who are (hopefully/normally) capable of rational thinking, not automata.

 

---------- Post added 18-06-2015 at 22:52 ----------

 

 

To which I have suggested an answer. Does it actually matter who answered?

 

So you can if you wish choose to ignore it all without consequence, the more rational you are the more likley you are to ignore it all, a little more rational thinking on your part and you can join the non believer club.

 

It still begs the question, what is the point of the book if it expected everyone to think for themselves?

[Halibut 12]

I asked this back in post #144 in reply to Mafya but didn't get a reply:

 

'Then should we consider those who take the passages in the Qur'an - all of them, or at least those that promote violence above those that promote love - to extremes, to be mentally incapable of taking them in the context they were written?'

 

I'm not trying to troll, it's a genuine question. I'm sure if I killed someone in the name of God without any remorse I'd be consigned to an institution.

 

I appreciate that you're asking the question with a genuine and un-trollish quest for understanding. I'm not Muslim, but (lapsed) Catholic.

 

My answer is that those who fillet out the dodgy parts of the Qur'an, or the Bible ( e.g. the Westboro'to Baptists) to attempt to justify hatred and killing are not neccesarily mentally ill, but that they're clearly damaged and inadequate people. And yes they are, as are so many contributors to this thread, unable to understand the context of the times in which they were written, even less so of seeing the bigger picture.

I'm acutely aware that in both Bible and Qu'ran there are passages which to most people today appear abhorrent, also acutely aware that both books can and should be read as a message of love, tolerance and responsibility towards each other.

 

---------- Post added 18-06-2015 at 23:10 ----------

 

So you can if you wish choose to ignore it all without consequence, the more rational you are the more likley you are to ignore it all, a little more rational thinking on your part and you can join the non believer club.

 

It still begs the question, what is the point of the book if it expected everyone to think for themselves?

 

I think that's both a false and a foolish statement. Is it rational to ignore Jesus's instruction to love your neighbour as yourself?

Are the ten commandments to be thrown out in the cause of rationalism?

 

In response to your final point - 'what's the point of the book...' - I thinks it's further evidence that you aren't a skilled thinker and lack both knowledge and intellectual prowess. I haven't really got the time right now, but maybe you could join a library or the Open University or something and open up your horizons and thinking skills a bit.