How, also, shall you respond to the fact that Muhammed, prophet of Islam, was a pedophile who had sex with a nine year old girl when he was 53?
Tabari IX:131 - “My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old.”
Tabari VII:7 “The Prophet married Aisha in Mecca three years before the Hijrah, after the death of Khadija. At the time she was six.”
Ishaq:281 “When the Apostle came to Medina he was fifty-three.”
Tabari VII:6 “In May, 623 A.D./A.H. 1, Allah’s Messenger consummated his marriage to Aisha.”
Any words attributed to Mohammed must be evaluated in light of his time and place. He was born into a society that was not a community. Even a small town like Mecca had no government, only an uneasy peace between tribal leaders, a peace often broken by blood-feuds. Mohammed was a warrior, but his ultimate goal was to unite his people into a peaceful community. By the standards of Seventh-Century Arabia, he stands out as a visionary man of peace. But it’s hard to see how any honest account of his life, his deeds, and his words would be clean of bloodiness.
You seem to be implying that since there are some verses in the Koran advocating violenve and people who claim to be Muslims are doing violent things the two are somehow related. Can you show us a direct connection between the two?
Let me draw a connection such as you seem to be making:
The J/C Bible, Exodus verse 22:18: Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
Now, can you show how that verse was the cause of the Salem Witch trails or the general witchcraze that took over Europe between 1450 and 1750? If you can, there would be LOTS of historians, anthropologists and sociologists who would love to talk with you.
Otherwise you’re just making a lot of ignorant noise.
I read/hear frequently Western media (English and others) and I don’t accuse “every” Western media of giving attention to what some idiots in a backwards corner say or write.
I also don’t say say that they all neglect the statements issued by for example the Al Alzhar. The problem however is that there is not much interest to bring the latter, while whenever something happens with Muslims involved, or something that some Muslim said in favour of these crimes, they simply jump on it.
So what I actually see is that there is no balance in the reporting and not much interest to change this.
Yet there is in this indeed a substantial difference between US and EU media and not only in the written press.
Well, if you read my comment… There is no such thing as a ** Muslim obligation** to condemn what others who declare to be Muslim do wrong.
I am most certainly not the only one who is disgusted by this insistence - which is amazingly enough seen as a normal thing, which for me only adds to my disgust - that we should declare something to be going against everything our religion stands for, just because the people comitting the crime claim to follow our religion (or claim even to act following the will of God).
Especially because this insistence that such statements should be made are repeated over and over again while the statements are already being made a long time ago.
Give you an example as point for comparison:
When a scandal of child abuse affecting the Catholic Church surfaced and became public, nobody asked the Vatican (or the Pope for that matter) to endlessly repeat that this was not in line with their religion.
Sure enough such statements were made… Everyone interested accepted it as being made and that was it.
It can be that I missed it, but as far as I know there is no almost daily repeated demands for the Pope to repeat endlessly what he declared earlier, even while the scandals stil enfolded and widened.
There was no demand for every Catholic leader on this globe to endlessly repeat these type of statements either.
Salaam. A
If you have a genuine interest in a discussion about things that bother you in what you read about or on Islam: Open an other thread to post your questions or remarks.
I said it earlier: I don’t waste my time and effort on writing exegeses and explanations - in a langauge I don’t master - in a thread like this one.
Sorry.
If you want to read on what I posted already about these issues on this message board, you can do that easily.
Do a search under my membername on the words
sura
Tafsir
exegeses
hadith
Muhammed
and you shall find already quite a lot.
This shall also help you to understand that throwing around random lines out of what you have read somewhere is not going to bring you very far in understanding what you actually bring up, where it comes from, what it means and how it needs to be evaluated.
Salaam. A
and, Salem Possessed by Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum, 1974.
Both show that the underlying causes of the witchcraze to be both political and economic instability. The European witchcraze happened during the continent’s transit between a feudal economy into an early capitalist one. Briggs builds (I believe) an effective argument for this, especially in chapter 10.
The same goes for the Salem witchcraze of 1692. The colony was in a political crises as well as economic. In Salem, itself, one family was losing economic power while the other was gaining it. Boyer & Nissenbaum’s documentation of this is excllent. The Biblical injunction about witches had little effect on either. If anything it would be merely an excuse to carry out violence against others.
I think the same could be said for PaulFiztroy’s postings from the Koran. The real reasons behind the terrorist attacks would be political or economic, not because of some religious motive.
I know, I know. But excuses can be very important sometimes. They make people feel good about going ahead with something that, otherwise, they might have moral doubts about.
PF thinks I am a sort of insect, since he takes Muslims for some sort of insects and in addition I am also Arab and hence I must be a double insect.
A deadly double insect.
So far I can follow the reasoning…
Because I am in fact double: Me, and my birthgift I call brother Dyslex and who never leaves me, so you can call us a sort of Siamese Twin. And this is indeed a deadly union. Just ask all my teachers still locked up in the madhouse.
Now that this is cleared up, let me see and read again…
PF thinks that because he takes me for a deadly twin-insect he can command me to do what he wishes me to do.
Now that was an unfortunate miscalculation, PF.
Since we are in the company of decent people, and in a strange mood of kindness, I permit you to politely kiss my hand to ask forgiveness.
Once you have done that you can try again asking me politely if I would do you the honour to explain and write the exegeses of the quotes you come up with.
You can post that request in an other thread, like I instructed you to do if you ever want to bring me so far to make such an effort for you.
I think the OP is hiding in a dark corner, scared to death merely by my presence on this message board.
Seen his enlightened look onto all things Muslim and Islam, that is in my view completely comprehensible.
By the way, can somebody translate post 73 in English that is understandable for a Deadly Towel Head Insect? (I know that is a difficult task to undertake, but maybe the poster himself can give it a try).
You’re not a towel head, you’re a reverse vampire.
Why I said that is because you didn’t seem to reply to what Pauls statement wanted you to do, and you seemed to have just gone on the ‘he’s a predujice’ thing. He’s a bigot yes, but at least try and refute him in clear English.
What is a “reverse” vampire? (I have a pet bat, but she doesn’t feed on blood).
[QUOTE]
Why I said that is because you didn’t seem to reply to what Pauls statement wanted you to do, and you seemed to have just gone on the ‘he’s a predujice’ thing.
[/QUOTE.]
Yes, yes… But my question was: What did you actually meant to say?
Sorry, but no. Not in a thread like this one. He can open a serious thread with serious quesitons expressing a serious intend to become informed, to honestly discuss, to be willing to honestly discuss/debate.
Read my posts in this thread explaining this because also explaining how much sweat and headaches it costs for me to reach a level of “clear English”.
I was clearing up the - understandable - error made by the OP in thinking that because I am perceived as a deadly-twin-insect, he could issue commands for me to write whatever he “wants” me to write for him.
I don’t know if this is clear English… But clear English is at this point in this thread really not my main concern
