Ali Sina's Letter to Mankind

[Khalid]

He was the son of the maidservant, not of the beloved wife. Abraham had some affection for him, even if he was quite wild.

are you Ibraham?..obviously you're not, that's just your baseless opinion.

Mohamed often mistaken about the right parental links. For example is thought Miryam, Moses's sister was the same Miryam than Jesus's mother. It's ridiculous since the first one lived 12 century before.

????...can you provide me a verse out of the Quran that can prove such baseless accusation?

Human sacrifice is of NO USE. Whatever the aim.
Even animal sacrifice is of no use. Sacrifices in the temple is more a consecration where a festive barbecue takes place. This is all about enjoying life, and share joy with G-od.
When the Jews want to symbolize the departure of the sins, they release a scapegoat in the desert. They don't kill him. They is nothing sacred in death.

Human sacrifice is worse than breaking any of the 10 commands. It's one of the implicit interdictions. So abominable, G-od prefered not to give a plain interdiction.
Suicide-bombers commit this wretched crime and who support them is cursed forever.

once more you failed to answer my question directly, this was my question: how are these two related?!..even if related what does the death of jesus on a cross have anything to do with the forgiveness of our sin, please explain?
why do i ask that? because you need to logically prove it as a fact.

He does not play games, but he judges fairly.

true

There is no thing such as heaven or hell.

how do you know that, or what makes you deny heaven or hell?...is that perhaps instructions from a new version of the Bible according to Pat Robertson?

G-od's justice is beyond whatever you can think about.

yes, God is the most fair-minded.

The greatest rabbi is not sure to be rewarded and the greatest crook is not sure to be annihilated. One must do our best until the end.

that's also what Islam teaches.

but how's that relevant to my question?

[MGB8]

Taoist... for the last 80 years Islam has not been "under siege" and the result has been ever increasing Islamism. I don't buy your argument.

[taoist]

Taoist... for the last 80 years Islam has not been "under siege" and the result has been ever increasing Islamism. I don't buy your argument.

Just as well, MBG8, as it's not for sale. This is a discussion board, and the purpose of my posts here, as on any other forum I visit, is to promote discussion. If you've specific objections to my argument, please share them. I promise I will consider them carefully.

Oh, and it's "taoist", I lack the boldness of fervent belief necessary for an upper case screen name.

80 years? That would place us at the fall of the Ottomans and the end of the Caliphate. On the contrary, it's more reasonable to assume such a date represents the beginning of the siege. With that fall went the best hope for easing our muslim brothers into the main track of modern development.

The direct surge in islamism as nearly as I can tell stems from the proselytization made possible by oil wealth directed toward the Saudis. The House of Saud itself is maintained with the support of the fundamentalist heirs of the 18th century Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab, himself most heavily influenced by the 13th century ibn Taymiya. The sects which derive from these messengers are founded on visions of a perfect Islam practiced by the Sahabah, prior to modern innovations which must have been responsible for the end to islamic expansion.

But that support has come at a price as surely as the pandering to the religious right in the US has promoted a return to supernaturalism and superstition in our own heartland. In particular, the reins to proselytization through fully funded madrassas have been loosed. I've seen the effects in west africa myself, and watched the news reports of its effects in southwest asia and indonesia.

It is not mere coincidence that the rise of this version of islam is so heavily correlated with the least prosperous nations on earth. The return on investment in such places is understandably very high. Given a society with more children than funds to feed, house and clothe them, the opportunity to ship a few off to a local madrassa that offers room and board is nearly irresistable to parents on the very edge of survival.

What is needed to prevent this are viable options. Ali Sina's call to simply abandon islam doesn't fit the bill. As a nontheist, I can only approve of the message, but as a rationalist, I cannot avoid noting its lack of practicality. These are not people who can be reached with a message devoid of hope.

Thank you for your thoughts.

As ever, Jesse

[Muslima]

and makes us right about Islam itself, it is evil cult made by profit pedophile and turn people t a monsters. and you are a victim, so I urge wake up, leave this evil and join humanity.

Do you really mean this or is it a reaction to Khaled bringing in distorted verses from the Talmud?

[Khalid]

Do you really mean this or is it a reaction to Khaled bringing in distorted verses from the Talmud?

why would you care what his baseless opinions are?

Mohammad died as a successful prophet, and for that reason he was never forgiven.

[MGB8]

I'll pass on the petty attempt at an insult - silly false assumption made with the intent to provoke, but ultimately merely stupid.

While I find some of your historical analysis persuasive, in particular the ties between dictatorships and rising Islamism (which you limit to the house of Saud and its ties to the Salafis and Wahabis, but can be extended to egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood) and Pakistan, Syria and to a lesser extent, Jordan, neither really explain Indonesia or Afghanistan, much less Europe.

Nevertheless, you providing not even argument to support the assertion that the fall of the Ottoman empire began a siege on the religion. What it did mark was the end of Turkish control of the Ummah and squabling between various Arab and/or Muslim leaders.

As for Ali-Sina's call.. it is one opinion, from a person with some basis for that opinion. Nothing more, nothing less. I agree, it is not a practical "option." Nevertheless, I believe it is an important message to have broadcast - as it creates pressure that will cause some to re-examine there views, other to justify Islam as not what Ali-Sina says it is, by forwarding moderate interpretation.

Here is some basic logic - what went on vis-a-vis Islam pre-9/11 has led to an increasingly bad situation. Therefor, other things need to be tried, and if they fail, then change course. However, it is pretty early to call any one option a failure - as this is a long term task we are talking about.

You have quite a bit of boldness in dismissing ali-sina as you do. Quite fervent belief indeed (or mere arrogance.)

[MGB8]

Do you really mean this or is it a reaction to Khaled bringing in distorted verses from the Talmud?

The view stated, while it may be exagerrated in response to Khalid, is a growing view, based on what appears to be wide-held beliefs in the Muslim world which make Islam (under an Islamist interpretation) incompatible with the West, which Westerners consider modernity.

Too much violence based on pride (Van Gogh), calls to genocide (ahmadinejad, hamas), calls to dominte (black flag of Islam over the white house, etc. etc.), leaders who have "last days" visions, killings and riots over cartoons, etc. etc. etc.

Right now, the spokespeople for Islam are named Bin Laden, Al-Zarqawi, Al-Zawahari, Al-Sadr, Khaleed Mashal, Kaddafi, Ahmadinejad, etc.

The rest of the Ummah has, far from rejecting their ideas, given at times half hearted reprobated but in general defended these people. At best, the mass of the Ummah has decided not to take sides in the war of the Jihadists versus the West... and at worst, the masses quietly support the Jihadists. So what do you expect?

When the articles on tolerance are dominated by the articles on conquest/domination/expansion/subjugations, the kafirs and other non-believers are not going to have a positive reaction.

[Muslima]

Second maybe your’re unaware of the following portion of Islamic history

Ishaq:462/Tabari VIII:30 “The Jews said, ‘We will never abandon the Torah or exchange it for the Qur'an.' Asad said,'”

.

LIES

Prophet of Doom is a lie and for retards, hatemongers and distorters (like yourself and ShimonG) No one with a shred of credibility relies on it for anything.

Do a search on google, and you will find out how much credibility Prophet of Doom has, it's a site of full of lies and bulls**** There are websites that are dedicated to exposing his lies. Im sure y ou're aware of that. Here is only one,
Rebuttal to Craig Winn "Prophet of Doom: JEWS" article:

List of Craig Winn's fabricated lies and deliberate alteration of quotes, WITH CLEAR-CUT PROOFS!

http://www.answering-christianity.co...k_rebuttal.htm

Craig Winn the founder of the site, has been exposed openly as a liar, and you still go to website and follow his lies. It shows you for the retard that you are.
You show how desperate you are to malign the greatest man in history (The Prophet)

About The Prophet's relations with the Jews:

Your lies and distortions and his relations with the Jews are all lies, but you already know that, because The Prophet's life was an open book, and it is very well documented. I don't even have to defend him, the truth speaks for itself and here it is by men more worthy and knowledgable than some ignorant liar like Craig Winn and his fans.

What non Muslims say about The Prophet
http://www.israelforum.com/board/sho...&postcount=104

http://www.israelforum.com/board/sho...&postcount=105

http://www.israelforum.com/board/sho...&postcount=106


What do you have to say about Sir George Bernard Shaw's opinion below? He was one of the the greatest historian's of his day, in the (1950's), he taught at Cambridge University, and he was a Jew.



(The Genuine Islam, Singapore, Vol. 1, No.8, 1936) by Sir George Bernard Shaw

"He must be called the Savior of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him
were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in
solving its problems in a way that would bring it much-needed peace and
happiness".

He was by far the most remarkable man that ever set foot on this earth. He
preached a religion, founded a state, built a nation, laid down a moral
code, initiated numerous social and political reforms, established a
powerful and dynamic society to practice and represent his teachings and
completely revolutionized the worlds of human thought and behavior for all
times to come.

[Muslima]

why would you care what his baseless opinions are?

Mohammad died as a successful prophet, and for that reason he was never forgiven.

because Ygalg isn't like SteveMetch and ShimonG (ignorant bigots) , he's one of the sensible ones here. I like him.

[Khalid]

Khalid, despite the slandering of the Talmud (please note that it remained on IF, unedited, and received a point by point response - hat tip ygalg), did bring up an important point:

That Mohammed's actions should be viewed not as eternal examples, but in the context of what was ok at the time. If Muslims en masse can accept this type of view, this opens the door for the evolution of Islam and moderate interpretations. If not, there is little to differentiate Islam and Islamism.

This point, therefore, is huge.

Now was this post a reply to my carelessness regarding ygalg1 post, if yes wouldn't you think it's childish of me to respond to such foolish and childish remarks:

Mohammad and his henchmen butchered jews for the reason of their belief and unacceptance of him also enslaved and raped. I read he is quite a pais...

??

[Khalid]

because Ygalg isn't like SteveMetch and ShimonG (ignorant bigots) , he's one of the sensible ones here. I like him.

surely not, yet again that last comment from him moved him up a notch closer to Klungo and Squitter!

[Muslima]

Greetings, SteveMetch,

Amalekites and Midianites much?

This kind of mudslinging at ancient practices of what we today consider barbaric cultures is historical revisionism. Certainly, these practices are likely to turn the stomachs of we moderns living in our carefully groomed communities with trash pickups every Wednesday, but our societies are simply incomparable.

As we've already seen a critique of the previously distorted citations from the Talmud, I thought I might offer at least one balancing critique. I have no access to Tabari, but the Sahih Bukhari is available online in a searchable format.

Bukhari, volume 5, book 59, number 459



If your objection is to the taking of slaves for sexual partners, your position is inconsistent with the old testament. If your objection is to coitus interruptus, note the full text of this hadith includes a proscription from the muslim's prophet.

As ever, Jesse

SteveMetch doesn't care about these things. As i've mentioned before, he only uses this board to lie and distort and to provoke trouble. He contributes nothing of value and brings in lies from hate sites.

I did warn Khaled not to fall for his (and ShimonG's) provocations but he did.

Khaled, one of SteveMetch's (and ShimonG's) goals here is to provoke trouble and hatred between Jews and Muslim's. Don't let them succeed.

[taoist]

I'll pass on the petty attempt at an insult - silly false assumption made with the intent to provoke, but ultimately merely stupid.

Greetings again, MGB8,

Speaking of false assumptions .. say what? Where? Certainly not intended. And if given inadvertently, my apologies.

While I find some of your historical analysis persuasive, in particular the ties between dictatorships and rising Islamism (which you limit to the house of Saud and its ties to the Salafis and Wahabis, but can be extended to egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood) and Pakistan, Syria and to a lesser extent, Jordan, neither really explain Indonesia or Afghanistan, much less Europe.

Again, it's not my purpose to persuade but merely to put my thoughts on the table. This is a discussion, I hope, and not a debate. Though I've no real objection to such, I prefer to do so more formally, with clear rules in a segregated thread.

I've studied the translated writings of Taymiya extensively and the more recent history of Saudi Arabia. I've also gone to some trouble trying to follow the branching sects, with a special interest in the shias, considering my nation's current involvement in Iraq and history with Iran. To supplement my reading and travels, I've also joined a number of muslim boards, including the board where I recently encountered a positive endorsement of this forum. I have hopes this first assay will not prove the endorsement false.

Certainly, my remarks are incomplete, but there is a limit to how much information can be placed into a single post without tiring the reader or usurping the thread. But in fact, I don't believe there's much room for dispute in following the rise of the Wahhabist sects in Afghanistan and their vectors through Pakistan during the Soviet occupation with the financial support of the Saudis.

I'm only barely familiar with the muslim brotherhood, but I seem to recall they were implicated in the death of Sadat. My knowledge of Egyptian Islam is still quite primitive. Mullah Omar was a member as well, I believe.

Nevertheless, you providing not even argument to support the assertion that the fall of the Ottoman empire began a siege on the religion. What it did mark was the end of Turkish control of the Ummah and squabling between various Arab and/or Muslim leaders.

Fair enough. I didn't supply an argument. The fall of the Ottomans, as you suggest, led to the squabbles between various muslim constituencies. In conversation with muslims, it appears this is seen through the filter of a conspiracy to divide and conquer. From this perception springs the rise of the Khalafist movements. This quest for a strong leader is surely the urge to find a banner around which to rally. As such, it represents the mentality of a people who feel themselves under siege. The only unifying principle they hold in common is their religion, and naturally, they hearken back to a time of relative strength.

As for Ali-Sina's call.. it is one opinion, from a person with some basis for that opinion. Nothing more, nothing less. I agree, it is not a practical "option." Nevertheless, I believe it is an important message to have broadcast - as it creates pressure that will cause some to re-examine there views, other to justify Islam as not what Ali-Sina says it is, by forwarding moderate interpretation.

Here is some basic logic - what went on vis-a-vis Islam pre-9/11 has led to an increasingly bad situation. Therefor, other things need to be tried, and if they fail, then change course. However, it is pretty early to call any one option a failure - as this is a long term task we are talking about.

You have quite a bit of boldness in dismissing ali-sina as you do. Quite fervent belief indeed (or mere arrogance.)

Your agreement with my analysis of his "option" while simultaneously claiming it bold, or merely arrogant, is contradictory.

In the best of all possible worlds, I would hope that we humans could free ourselves from the bonds of ancient superstitions related in millenia old sacred texts. Ali Sina's call to this resonates with me. But my wish for him to prove correct is tempered by reason. And it is not reasonable to expect those on the defensive to respond with moderation.

Rulers from time immemorial have revived flagging support by appealing to the threat of a foreign enemy. Daniel Ortega of recent memory played this card each time it appeared the US congress was about to withdraw funding from the Contras. Fidel Castro has an even longer history of gaming this card.

What went on pre-9/11 is difficult to defend. The overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran, the support for despotic rulers, the double-dealing in support of both sides in the Iran-Iraq war, the prioritization of corporate interest over human rights ... these are the origins of the "bad situation" we face in seeking new solutions for the muslim world. Americans in their isolationist hearts have never paid sufficient attention to our foreign policies, and are woefully ill informed about how our actions affect other nations.

What is needed for Islam is a reformation. I do not pretend to believe that such would be any less bloody than that presaging the enlightenment. If Ali Sina can present one small path toward that end, bully for him. But I cannot in fairness admit that it is a path for any but the smallest minority, and leaves the largest part of the problem not only unaddressed, but worsened.

I do not have answers to this crisis. But I believe that if answers are to be found, it is necessary to critically examine the facts on the table to assure ourselves that we are addressing the right crisis.

Again, thank you for your thoughts.

As ever, Jesse

[taoist]

SteveMetch doesn't care about these things. As i've mentioned before, he only uses this board to lie and distort and to provoke trouble. He contributes nothing of value and brings in lies from hate sites.

I did warn Khaled not to fall for his (and ShimonG's) provocations but he did.

Khaled one of SteveMetch's (and ShimonG's) goals here is to provoke trouble and hatred between Jews and Muslim's. Don't let them succeed.

My thanks, Muslima, wa alaikum assalam,

In a one on one debate, I'd have special interest in engaging with my respondent. But in a general discussion thread, one can hope that the other participants, and especially the lurkers, will be the primary audience and beneficiaries. Given a fixed purpose and sufficient time, I've never failed to bridge the gap with even the most determined antagonist. But such is not my purpose with SteveMetch.

In its own wisdom, this board disallows introduction threads, and so I am forced to begin with another's subject. Scanning the current threads under discussion under "New Posts", this one appealed to me more than the others. But basically, these first posts on this board are intended merely to set a tone, and perhaps to discover those with a taste for my rather odd, some might say stilted, turn of phrase.

I am not a theist, and will not become one. My interest in these fora is not in the belief systems, but in the believers themselves. As much as a greater understanding of the belief systems aids my understanding of the believers, I am a willing audience. But I must be honest enough to tell you that it is you I respect, and not your beliefs.

As ever, in peace, Jesse

[Khalid]

SteveMetch doesn't care about these things. As i've mentioned before, he only uses this board to lie and distort and to provoke trouble. He contributes nothing of value and brings in lies from hate sites.

I did warn Khaled not to fall for his (and ShimonG's) provocations but he did.

Khaled, one of SteveMetch's (and ShimonG's) goals here is to provoke trouble and hatred between Jews and Muslim's. Don't let them succeed.

agreed, i'll keep it real from now on.