And if that were all the advice I gave then your snark would be justified.
It wasn’t, so it isn’t.
don’t mention it…oh! you didn’t.
This is what I came in to say, after reading the OP.
Damn, if a poster had come in and asked the same thing about the Bible, you’d be all over yourselves giving examples, and none would ever demand that he read it. He asked for a reasonable request, and there are certainly examples to give.
You don’t know my friend, you don’t know me, and you don’t know the conversations we have. But you have such high confidence in something which you have next to no basis for. Are you religious by any chance?
I specifically mentioned that I wasn’t interested in discussing whether or not the line of argument I was talking about was effective or not.
I was asking a specific question. Instead of responding to that question in any material way, you came in and threadshat on the very first response. I’m sorry I wasn’t very polite.
I am a non-religious Muslim who never prays has not been to mosque in decades, and does not even do the Ramadan all the time.
I have seen enough of these tedious excercises and lived long enough as a religous minority that I am bored by this type of Mansplaining and its self-preening pretensions…
the number of posters who are athiest but who have a good command of your majority religion text - as perhaps educated in it - is large here.
the number who have any kind of education in the Quran, the Hadith, the tafsir, to be credible and do more than copy-paste from hate-mongering sites is near zero.
I can guarantee that almost all muslims living in the western countries have had quite enough of the experience of the recitation from these sites and the gotcha games, enough that even the not-really practicing feel actually more inclined to practice out of simple irritation.
Many, many things.
A perfect example of what I was talking about, that ‘annotated’ site.
I quote Malthus from the GD
tedious behaviours, the proslytizing of either side.
Yeah, that horrible hate mongering cite- Wikipedia. :rolleyes:
Unless you think that my cite from Verse 4:34 is false?
So then- just dont post.
I would. In fact, the OP apparently has some familiarity with the Bible, and I would assume that was gained by reading.
No, my familiarity with the Bible is from posts on this message board. Never read it.
To Ramira (in re Post #27): It may be that irritation is the objective; perhaps they have a lot of time on their hands and have nothing better to do.
You might run in the issue that only the arabic version of the Koran is authoritative. I did when I argued with some guy that it was condoning slavery. He denied it. When I pointed to some verses, he said that it was a French translation, hence not worth a damn, and that the arabic version was probably saying something different (“servant” instead of “slave”, for instance). He wouldn’t check the Arabic version, either, and in fact I doubt he could read classical Arabic.
That means you’re merely familiar with some of the Bible. Why not read the whole thing? Why not read some of the commentaries on the Bible? Of course you do not have to convert to a believer of any stripe.
Why not do the same with the Qur’an?
Then I suggest you do so. You might be able to find brand new absurd and offensive material!
“Too much work. I don’t want to know anything about it, I just want to be able to troll people it’s important to.”
–A possible answer, though only the OP knows how truly it represents his actual views.
That sounds as though you are saying you see what you expect to see.
Your capacity for strange distortions can be impressive.
Of course I was not commenting on wikipedia at all, but making the specific observation “the number who have any kind of education in the Quran, the Hadith, the tafsir, to be **credible **and do more than copy-paste from hate-mongering sites is near zero”.
Of course, I myself would not pretend to comment in substance on the character of another religion, like say the Hinduism or the Budhdhism or even a close one like the Judaism by the reading of Wikipedia, as I think the idea of reading a wiki page and thinking one has substance to make any real comment on the belief or the substance of that religion to be ridiculous and shallow.
yes, there is a whole category of persons like that here.
In fact the terms are indeed genuinely ambiguous (maybe they were not at the time, but in a thousand years…). But that is not my argument (to agree with the person).
You were responding to my post, and my post was copy paste from Wikipedia. Show me where in this thread there has been: “copy-paste from hate-mongering sites”.
No one is attempting to “comment in substance on the character of another religion”. That verse is commonly commented on in discussion of the Koran. I simply used wiki to find that verse easily and use it as a easy translation from a neutral source.
However, if you dont like wiki, try:
The Human Cycle - Eighteen Lessons with Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Jalali
By Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Jalali or
or
http://www.shiavault.com/books/the-human-cycle/chapters/6-lesson-4
(this last discusses the verse)
or any of thousands of cites.
It’s a freaken verse from the Koran.** It says what it says**. I didnt attempt to “comment in substance on the character of another religion”, I simply quoted a well known verse.* Do you claim that verse is not in the Koran? *