Islam is not bad, too many of you are ignorant of history.

[dib8rman]

superchunk said:

dib8rman said:

 

Did I disagree with you? No, I do know your ideology though and that I know very well. I've said it before, I've argued with much more eloquent fanatics than yourself.

I have a saying that nihilism requires a level of fanaticism and hardly does the fanatic notice a trend.

Impersonal is the word to best describe my argument with your ideology so believe if you must what you want about my agreeing or disagreeing with you and any emotion therein. The worst you could do is show how feeble your ability to acquire and condense information is, which if not already apparent only seems more overt by your inept evaluation of 'what I am saying.'which as far as I am concerned you don't need to tell me what I am saying only because I know it very well I said it after all, in fact doing so draws suspicion to your line on how 'scholarly' my post was. To the point though:

So you've decided to take a road in your satire where you retreat and retreat looking for some moralhigh ground, it's quite pathetic and if you must then I'll kick the sand from under your feet for a second.

The idea of God King and Country and other theocratic ideologies are exactly that, it is a design by men to convince men that they through an unknown have an answer to everything except of course the unknown which in turn cannot be known (oh the convenience). As paradoxical as that may seem the bow tie of it all happens to be faith. In all this wouldn't be a problem until the messenger makes injunctions in the name of said unknown.

Your hypocrisy was within the petition of this Hadith vs Qur'an issue then when I put it plainly how I define a believeryou say that that isn't what you believe which coincidentally was exactly what you were saying Muslims should be doing with less practiced words. If only because you already know that what is in the Qur'an and invariably all holy texts that does not appeal to your personalized desire to survive, my hat's off to you, you can put yourself in another person's shoes and at the least that's one small step for man.

Your entire jostle on Medieval Christianity and Modern Islam is contrasting or comparing apples to oranges to lettuce to carrots. Unless now your saying that theological devices are also political devices, leading to why Islam; Hadith's or Qur'an's importance in politics would not make or has not made much of a difference and in turn making your point moot and thus the self destructive trend of all relativistic arguments by the whim of pragmatics.

I think I finally figured out what you remind me of. You know that scene in Good Will Hunting where Matt Damon's character first meets his girlfriend in that bar and makes a snobby pretentious kid who simply enjoyed out talking other people with as much "educated philosophy" as possible based solely on his lated readings? That seems like all you've been trying to do with your last few posts to me.

I don't characterize labels such as CHristian or Muslim soley on the definition of a person's habits. In that argument I gave an actual literal definition of the word Muslim and an example of those other Muslims define as "Muslim" yet your definition would not as they did not follow the rules/practices laid out in the Qur'an, principally, because it didn't exist.

Additionally, I don't label people as Christian/Muslim unless they do, regardless of their practices because I do not follow the entire set or rules set out in the Qur'an. I don't pray in the same manner 5 times a day, I do eat pork, etc. This is my own personal take on religion where I see organized religion and the specific path with stringent rules in the Qur'an as intended for those weak and unable to simply be good people. I relate this idea back to both the Bible and specific verses in the Qur'an. In the Bible where the question is asked about what are the most important parts of the 10 commandments and the Qur'an's verse I quoted earlier in this thread that speaks of everyone getting to heaven so long as they believe and do good works. Both share the same philosophy that simply believing in God as well as being a good human being is all that God really wants. The rest is only there to help those who need these "blinders" to stay straight.

This is not fanatical or hypocritical. Its just my personal relationship with God. Since I do believe Muhammad was a prophet and in the Qur'ans message and I do submit myself to God, then I do fit the literal definition of Muslim, however, I'm sure many others would not label me as such.

Finally, you can word smash it all you want, but the Dark Ages of Christianity is exactly like the present in Islam. Hopefully it won't take the hundreds of years it took Christianity for the Muslim world to reform. Of course to agree on that point you have to agree that Islam and the Qur'an are not inherently violent/evil. That crucial point is where we disagree.

I see and you’re supposedly my Matt Daemon? That's a question by the way.

I'm sorry but your personal belief in god isn't enough of a reason to argue that that belief or the source of that belief should be imposed on others. (By others I am talking about the Hadith following Muslims Mr. Pork eating Muslim.)

You don't understand either how much of a hypocrite you are by saying you’re a Pork eating Qur'an practicing Muslim, unless you change that and say you don't actually practice the Qur'an, to which you have descended from reaching to Allah and the big mountain goat in heaven to reaching to Satan and hell fire. I will say though that that is not a bad thing and actually really cool. In the end the only issue I'm left with is your condescending line of argument, which isn't worth debating about.

Lastly Muslims have been killing each other over Islam for over 1370 years, the Shi'a and the Sunni have been at each other’s throats over who takes Mohammad’s place hence the Hadiths. In every way this is only because of Allah's mortality because his word died with his prophet.

Back on to your first paragraph though, I can't resist this one; by gum your evolving right in front of my eyes. You've moved to saying that I essentially read information from a biased perspective, nullifying its veracity all because of my mortal ego. It's like what I'm typing goes in one eye and out the other with you. Impersonal is the best word to describe my position.

Would it enlighten you a little to learn that I've had these same debates so many times that I have essentially copy pasted most of my responses to you from old e-mails? I made minor changes here and there but for the most part it's the same stuff, my honesty is the only thing you could be finding even mildly offensive (if that).

You by the way started this thread, don't start that "I'm the victim" jumbo now, you missed that boat in the OP with all the arrogance you exhumed. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you were just being provocative, okay fine, just get your facts straight before you talk about how others should think and live their lives as a matter of fact keep those thoughts to a blog or forum or some... oh snap!

^_^

I haven't trolled this hard in a while ;D