Misleading info on Islam
I just finished my letter to the writer of www.bible.ca
Has anybody read all that they write about Islam? Sounds like a JW in the works to me. Well this is my letter folks, dont know why im posting it but what the hell ?!?!?!
I feel that your site is very good. It’s very informative and clear, and is often a pleasure to read. Yet I feel that one section of your site lets it down so much.
The section in question is about Islam. I must admit, I promise you that if you were to have known me personally, I probably would have seemed to you like the last person to ever speak up favorably against Muslims. Yet I feel that I must do this as Muslims seem to get a rough deal from all those that are unfamiliar with their faith and from those that are just plain ignorant regarding issues surrounding Muslims. Unfortunately, I feel as if this is what your site has portrayed on its section regarding Islam.
I am a Christian myself. I feel that the more people that come to know Christ the better; the bible even tells us that there is more joy in heaven when one man repents than when 99 righteous people who have no need of repentance. (Luke 15v7) So obviously I'd welcome anybody just as Christ welcomes them into his flock.
Yet I feel that there is no need to blatantly sensationalize things just to get attention. In my eyes, it’s a big waste of time. If you are an atheist, by the same way in which you speak about the Quran you could speak about the Bible.
For instance, you write unfavorably about Islamic female subjection, in your articles about the 'toothbrush'. You cite this text as an example:
"Men are in charge of women, because Allah has made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah has guarded. As for those from whom you fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted, Great." (Pickthall's version of the Koran, Quran,
Does not the Holy Bible teach wifely subjection also? Granted, it speaks nothing of beating your wife into submission, yet we should likewise remember the command found in the Bible in Proverbs 22:15, "Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child; the rod of correction will drive it far from him."
Do you not think that running a story about what the Quran says regarding submission is hypocritical when you use a rule for one but another rule for yourselves? Writing this, I almost feel hypocritical myself and Jesus words in the Sermon on the Mount come to mind, where he warned us to stop judging others. We should all take this rule to heart.
I find the comments made regarding ‘killing Christians’ almost laughable. To state this so plainly is naivety of an inexcusable level. To believe that ALL Muslims follow this ‘Pact of Umar’ and to state that Mohammed planted the seeds of terrorism in Islam is likewise inexcusable. I once heard a saying that sounded so good to me at the time but now the more I hear it the more foolish it gets: ‘It is true that most Muslims are not terrorists. But most terrorists are Muslims ‘. Again, this is showing naivety of an unprecedented level.
To back up any of those accusations, you must surely provide proof. Can you provide proof that most Muslims follow the Pact of Umar? Can you provide proof that Mohammed planted the seeds of terrorism into Islam? I strongly think not. Just remember; Christians are just as guilty of bloodshed as any other religious group, as history can prove.
You bring out your own ideas as to what Islam means. You say it doesn’t mean peace. You even mention a verse in the Quran to back up your statements, found here:
"Fight and slay the pagans [Christians] wherever ye find them and seize them, confine them, and lie in wait for them in every place of ambush" (Surah 9:5)
Who inserted the word Christian into this text? By doing this, you are just as guilty as the truly fanatical Muslims that do insert this word into the text, and likewise just as guilty as the truly fanatical Christian that may interpret a verse in a way that succumbs to his fanatical way of thinking.
There are many other malfunctions present on your site, yet to explain them all would take all day. You have obviously been subject to intense media propaganda regarding the nature of Islam world wide. Just remember, you see what they want you to see. If they want you to see a fanatical Muslim blow himself up in the
I.E., correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it true that when a muslim male dies he expects to go to heaven to have sex with 70 virgins? And the following day, doesn't he get 70 more and so on?
If this really is their belief, what's in it for the women?
Dansk ; you name where it mentions that in the Quran and then come back and talk to me.You will find that it nowhere states anything like that in the Quran ; just as nowhere in the bible does it state that you cannot vote...
This is one tough subject, and I think it's kind of like trying to walk along the edge of a knife.
I usually cringe when people read a couple of articles about Islam (usually written by someone who read only a couple articles him/herself), and voila! A conclusion. This happens with both sides of any argument. Easy as rolling off of a log. Easy for me, so maybe I'll do it here by mistake!
I've read most of the Koran (it got kind of boring and repetitious for me at about 80 percent thru, so I figured I'd probably hit the main parts by then.), but I'm not an expert. I've read some stories from the Haddith, that is, the sayings of Mohammed, and bits from some other historical collections they have. Often people atribute to the Koran what is not expressly written there (kill Christians, for example). However, when the sayings of Mohammed are understood alongside his own actions and the actions of his contemporaries, and subsequent followers, the interpretation of the Koran to mean an allowance (or even the duty) to kill people who refuse to convert becomes more clear.
I think this is why so many kinds of Muslims exist. Many are more familiar with the Koran, not with the rest. The students in Cairo, attending various fundamentalist mosques, get the full-blown treatment: There are times when Mohammed acted mercifully; there are also times when he didn't; there are times when he was more tolerant; by the end of his life, he would give permission for his followers to execute anyone who decided that they wanted to return to Judaism or Christianity (or paganism). There are lots and lots of graphic stories!
Also, the Koran itself gets frustrating, because it gives double sets of teachings, like ones for mercy, and ones for showing NO mercy for pagans. There is a special word that is used for this situation, and I forget what the darn word is. (Abrogation?) The word refers to the belief of Muslim clerics and teachers that the Koran was written first with one set of directions, and then later the newer revelations from God replaced the old revelation. (Hey, does this sound familiar?) There is division in Islam about which revelation came first, especially tolerant or intolerant verses. And so, some Muslims are very peaceful, and some get whipped into a frenzy by fanatical leaders. The fanatics' argument is that Mohammed was the greatest prophet, and so his own words and example are the best interpretation of the Koran. (And that would make sense to me if I were a Muslim, so perhaps I'd be a bit fanatical, too.) The others simply say that the Koran, not any other writing, is what they must live by.
Anyway, this is a very basic explanation, not a research paper. The internet is a great resource for folks who want to learn more.