From Koranic Islam to Biblical Christianity… a case of ‘from the frying pan into the fire’… Why do people continue to seek external authorities — be it gods or be it governments? High time for everyone to break on through to the other side.
“Arms that chained us eyes that lied, break on through…”
I am confused, is what she is saying FACT or just her opinion based on biased sources and agenda for 15 minutes of fame and for a chance to settle in Sweden? What is the motive for this story – information sharing or spreading more hate in the world? As a forensic investigator, it’s in my nature to make a decision based on hard facts. So for each and all of her allegations against this religion of Hate, I would ask her for to please refer me to the direct source of reference in the Qur’an (NOT KORAN) and genuine Hadith to back up her claims and produce the evidence.
Surely we should know what the Quran says and it shouldn’t be confusing? Maybe we can establish some ‘hard facts’ together Loriza. Mona Walter’s twitter points to a few links that we could start with:
After three years of research in texts of 10 biggest religions linguist concludes: Islam… http://10news.dk/?p=855
A Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn’t by Robert Spencer –
She also gives this link which shows a guy who I assume has read the Quran explaining that certain modern religious groups have focused on hateful parts of the Quran and ignored the kind parts and that as a result, today, in general, muslims hate christians and jews.
So let’s now look at some sites that supposedly have direct quotes from the Quran that are claimed as being hateful and violent. Perhaps they have faulty translations and the arabic language does not actually say these things?
What does the Religion of Peace Teach About… – http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm
A list of Quran hate quotes – http://worldmediamonitoring.com/list-quran-hate-quotes/
Cruelty in the Quran – http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/cruelty/long.html
THE 10 MOST DIABOLICAL EVIL TEACHINGS IN ALL HUMAN HISTORY – http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/195861
I guess it really begs the question about reliability of translations from arabic.
Have you read the Quran (in English or another that you fully understand)?
And do you know if there are different translations and how varied they are?
Gav, I am not a religious person but it does seem like you are cherry picking information that support what you already believe. There is a lot of stuff up for interpretation in most religions, which is why there are quite a few sects of Islam. There are arguments for and against Islam but the women in the video obviously doesn’t know what she is talking about. It’s a sensationalist propaganda video.
Cherry picking… you mean as in finding the violent hateful quotes in the Quran rather than the kind and peaceful ones?
And you’re just spreading the hate even more? Well done… hope it finds you peace.
Simon, yes there’s a lot of room for interpretation in most religions, hence various sects. I guess overall we need to look at the generally apparent evidence of the senses as to the current manifestation of religious interpretations.
Lereza, does a forensic scientist spread murder by identifying evidence for it?
Gav, you know what cherry picking is. I don’t expect you to read up about every version of Islam, learn Arabic and read the Koran directly. If it is irrelevant to you, then don’t bother with these kinds of comments. There is a lot more to whats going on than is apparent on the surface.
Surely it is possible to demonstrate what the Quran says without me having to learn Arabic? Words have translatable meanings. Sentiment of meaning is universal.
Do you want an abstract?
Do you speak Arabic and have you studied the Quran in Arabic? I’m not sure how an abstract applies here.
I know some Arabic and read some of the Quran. I can’t give you a summary.
Maybe you have time for this hate spreading shit but I certainly don’t. Read what you want to read and believe what you want to believe. Draw you own conclusions. Just remember Gavriel Shaw a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing… and you certainly have a LOT more to learn and a long long way to go dearie.
There is just too much in it. Islam is also about what the prophet did as well as what is in the Quran.
Ok.. hmm… then is it your view that based on the limited reading you’ve made of the Quran that claiming it contains many such passages of explicit violence and hate is false?
Or would that itself perhaps be cherry picking based on a belief that you have ungrounded in not actually having read the Quran in Arabic?
I have been taught one version of Islam based on one version of the shia sect. I can’t represent all muslims because I don’t have enough information. Its like asking me to explain quantum physics to you in a few sentences and quotes.
Lereza, just as you questioned what my motives are, I’m curious what your motives are.
Well you seem to be Mr know it all, figure it out.
Simon, I wouldn’t bother with this one. haters will always be haters. He has his mind made up with only a fraction of what he’s learned through the media. He hasn’t bothered to go to a Scholar or Mufti to get the real answers…
The question is: are all of those translated quotes more or less accurate statements of what is in the Quran, or not? No mufti necessary.
I don’t have time for backward thinkers.
I just don’t like it one someone who is ignorant on a subject writing about it when you in fact have a limited understanding of it. I get equally annoyed when people say what they think are scientific facts when they don’t know what they are talking about.
I don’t know how my laptop works, but I can certainly claim that it appears to produce an image on the screen using light reflecting various ‘computer programs’ that I control through keyboard and mouse. I don’t need to be a computer engineer or scientist to do that.
Your argument is not that far from when people say that evolution is not true because we don’t look like monkeys, that it is just a theory and where is the missing link. Its uninformed opinions. Its just a pet peeve of mine. To be honest I really don’t care much about what you think of Islam in general. Like I said, I am not a religious person by any stretch.
Gav, I have to agree with Simon on this one. you tend to lean towards a very narrow black and white interpretation of events, all found from popular news sources. You can’t just pigeon hole Muslims in that way, especially not if you claim to be a more plural thinker
There are many aspects you’ve completely missed, and I think you know that, which makes you no different than the hate filled ukip type talk we have today
To be honest Gav, I am surprised with you. I thought you were smarter than this and see through that video for what it is.
It matters far less if a particular issue is used as common propaganda by mainstream media than if the story actually has deeper validity. Like I said of the video ‘from the frying pan into the fire’. I know it’s christian propaganda. It still highlights a very legitimate concern about religion though. None of you are dealing with the actual issue of inherent violence apparent in Islam through available English translations of the Quran.
Gav, read up about Wahibism. Its history and dissemination by countries such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Even then it would not give you a full picture of what is going on. Like I said before, this is an extremely complicated issue that I wouldn’t be able to answer for you with quotes and soundbites.
Surely you have to accept the legitimate concern of an ‘ignorant outsider’ who sees such an apparently obvious cultural reality inherent in Islam the world over of rife suppression and violence. I really don’t know how you could expect me or anyone else to see things differently.
You both know I see mainstream news as heavily propagandized, yet reality still shines through the cracks. Do you expect me to readily believe that all of the apparently Islamic world violence (along with those translations from the Quran) is nothing but Christian political propaganda?
What would help a lot is simply pointing me to an English translation with commentary that explains the translation of the Quran demonstrating why and how the array of apparent violent citations are in fact not violent.
I will take the time to try and search for such translation commentary myself. And will continue this discussion. For now I must pop out.
I will look up Wahibism. If you have any links that will help accelerate my learning curve, they would be most welcome.
I am sorry Gav but I don’t. It would also bias your research. I am not surprised that many people who live in the west think that Islam is an inherently violent religion. There are versions of it that espout violence.
Its what they see in the media all the time. But like you well know, things are not always what they seem.
Its a complicated topic, I choose not to spend my time researching it. There are a number of other things I find more interesting. I am honestly surprised with myself that I have paid this much attention to it.
Gav, for protection you can call me 24 hours a day…
I suggest you watch your back as news of this, my infidel friend could spread like wild fire…
Your views might not be appreciated by your neighbour, lol…
I certainly do not want to see your head in a basket.. I will then have the long task
David the yid…x
Imran and I are currently arguing about whether to go with the sniper rifle or the machete for a beheading.
Or perhaps the AK47, I better consult the Quoran to find what Allah thinks is most appropriate in this situation.
Haha yeh the “Koran” should have the weapons of choice listed.. Good to see Gav has some great sources from clearly highly intellectual people on the comments here
Guys the only way forward is love… The true element that reigns upon all…
Irrespective if you are guy, transsexual, a women, an imman, a rabbi, priest or animal…
We all share love and that can heal everything…
David, life is not really as simple as that. I believe it all starts with rights. Such as the right to an education, health care, freedom of speech amongst others. But even that is not simple. For instance, should people have a right to incite hatred. To infringe on this right would take away the freedom of speech but would be arguably less detrimental to society as a whole. An issue that occured in America recently was a law allowing people to discriminate who they serve based on their beliefs. For the government to interfere would be taking away the rights of these business owners but should they be allowed to discriminate against gays, jews, muslims, people of colour etc. There aren’t many easy answers in life.
Education being stripped of one’s rights should not be tolerated, health care is everyone’s G-d given right, freedom of speech, well that is debatable no? Was it not freedom of speech that has caused mass genocides? I would say freedom of speech but to a certain level….
My conclusion to saying love is the answer, well ultimately this…
Here is why…
The puppeteers play a major role in our society and are to a certain extent behind the scenes.. If there energy was converted to love, this ripple effect would spread… My good friend this is inherent in our core genes right from the beginning.. It was Adam that an unquenchable love for his FATHER…
(let’s not debate religion now,lol, I feel we shall all go on until the end of time)
As well as this powerful healthy drug, using the force of love transfers the unhealthy energy of negativity… This aura of pure good karma certainly heals..I’ve experienced it and it is beautiful…
So, my conclusion is, pioneering the only force that is proven to win,….LOVE, plain and lofty love…
The rest will happen… It the belief in love that charges the engine of life…
A few grammatical mistakes guys, sorry, just rushed out of a lesson
I’ve read a couple articles on Wahibism and it seems to be a source of radical islamic extremism which advocates violence etc.
The question is, has Wahibism emphasized an existing violent anti-humanist immorality that is in fact inherent in the religion… or, has it co-opted the true religion by preying on a moral deficiency in the religion that has led to a rise in violent anti-humanist immorality?
Chicken or egg scenario.
Either way is not a good explanation or justification for violence and suppression in contemporary Islam.
It’s not only ‘mainstream [western] media’ that reveals suppression and violence in Islam. Muslim media and individual video clips on youtube help demonstrate the apparent suppression and violence that is part of the Islamic world.
Here’s an example or two:
I don’t believe Islam advocates this kind of violence, but again, it’s chicken and egg. How strongly does Islam protect women from this? What is the islamic punishment supposed to be against a man who does this to his wife?
This is gut wrenching if you really think about it and I do believe this kind of suppression and subjugation of women is endemic in much of the Muslim world (perhaps not in the West).
So it seems we don’t need western mainstream media to see there is a lot of violence in the muslim world.
I will continue to search for some kind of verifiable translation or refutation of violent Koranic scripture.
David, just to make sure you don’t feel left out from my feedback here… where do you think Islam learned how to justify violence? Bingo mi amigo. From Judaism.
“An oral tradition was even attributed to Muhammad wherein he supposedly said, “Relate from the people of Israel, and there is no objection,” thereby enabling Islamic scholars to cite precedents from Jewish scholarship. – http://www.meforum.org/717/assessing-english-translations-of-the-quran
Islam learned it’s fundamental techniques from Judaism. Holy War came first in the Old Testament, before the New Testament or Koran.
The monotheist Abrahamic religions. All pretty much the same in essence.
On interpreting/tranlsating the Koran and reference to Wahibism (Saudi) this passage is noteworthy:
“Medieval Muslim scholars sought to abandon consideration of the Jewish and Christian testaments as sources of understanding the Qur’an; they largely succeeded. Most religious authorities in Islamic countries, particularly in Saudi Arabia and Iran, oppose any attempt to reinterpret the Qur’an without relying on medieval scholarship.
For most Muslims unaware of the evolution of Islamic scholarship, the Qur’an is immutable and uncreated, even though the Qur’an never makes such a proclamation, and theologians reached such a conclusion only after much debate. Immutability means that the seventh century values of some Qur’anic verses, rather than being placed in their seventh century Arabian context, are portrayed as the eternal divine mandate, giving rise, for example, to an argument that females must inherit half as much as males.
The failure of Muslim scholars to place the Qur’an into historical or spatial context has lead to generalizations that have harmed Islam, a trend accentuated by the fact that most Quranic translators are now Muslims. Such a failure facilitates the use of the Qur’an by governments that support chauvinism and incite hate and by terrorists” – http://www.meforum.org/717/assessing-english-translations-of-the-quran
“Until Muslims learn to question the reliability of the Muslim oral traditions, or divorce themselves from medieval exegetical constructs, they will be living in a world much apart from the Judeo-Christian entity that has known reformation and enlightenment. “
That page also includes these interesting points which in a nut shell says that Muslims today can’t understand the Koran because they don’t understand Judaism.
…the Qur’an presupposes familiarity with Judeo-Christian ideas to the extent that it often does not give the full version of a narrative; there is no need to identify what is supposed to be common knowledge.
…Evidence of Muhammad’s familiarity with Judaism is present in the Qur’an. One verse suggests that his contemporaries accused him of having a Jewish teacher.
When some Arabs challenged Muhammad’s claim to be a prophet based on his mortality, he suggested that they consult Jewish scholars about history.
Early Muslims resorted to Jewish lore so heavily that they produced a genre of literature: the Isra’iliyat, loosely translated as the Judaic traditions.
By the ninth century, this began to change. Muslim jurists, increasingly opposed to reliance upon Jewish lore, created new sayings from the Prophet and his companions that contradicted the original allowances.
In one of these apocryphal traditions, Muhammad’s face changes color when he sees his follower Umar reading the Torah. Muhammad declares that had Moses been their contemporary, he, too, would have followed the Muslim prophet. An alternate version claims that the Prophet asked Umar, “Do you wish to rush to perdition as did the Jews and Christians? I have brought you white and clean hadiths [oral traditions].” Despite the unreliability of this hadith, it has evolved into a position that any Muslim who questions it could be accused of heresy.
Since Muslims could no longer seek support from Jewish sources, successive generations of scholars lost understanding of Qur’anic references.
From the tenth century on, the result has been that voices of the medieval scholars have trumped the vox-dei. Without a serious reexamination, it is uncertain whether Muslims will be able to get to the essence of their religion’s main document.
That page says:
“The 1955 translation of Arthur Arberry (1905-69) was the first English translation by a bona fide scholar of Arabic and Islam. … The Arberry version has earned the admiration of intellectuals worldwide … remains the reference of choice for most academics. It seems destined to maintain that position for the foreseeable future.”
I guess this is the one to review supposed violent citations then…
Arberry translation of Koran is available at https://archive.org/details/QuranAJArberry
Ok so current view on all this:
The Arberry version is accepted by Academia (which is generally an irreligious / secular approach) as being very accurate to the original Arabic Koran.
There are a lot of violent references that apparently exist in other translations that do not appear in the Arberry version. Good news.
The more violent translations seem to emerge out of medieval times (also during which time apparently a lot of racist/violent Jewish scripture was written too).
Yet, today’s contemporary Islam seems significantly influenced by this medieval violent period.
A question remains: to what degree does contemporary Islamic suppression and violence align to the original meaning of the original Arabic Koran?
The Arberry version certainly contains references to apparent murderous torture for non-believers:
4:58 “Surely those who disbelieve in Our signs — We shall certainly roast them at a Fire; as often as their skins are wholly burned, We shall give them in exchange other skins, that they may taste the chastisement. Surely God is All-mighty, All-wise.”
By secular humanist standards, this gives no reassurance or appearance as being a religion of peace and tolerance.
Nor is fundamentalist Christianity. Nor fundamentalist Judaism. The monotheistic Abrahamic yahweh religions are apparently explicitly racist and violent according to the best of interpretations/translations currently available.
And the key point remains, that people like Mona Walter as per the original video in this thread, are identifying genuine hateful violence within contemporary Islamic culture. This is not just western media propaganda.
I just can’t figure out why she doesn’t also see the same in the Christian Bible. Revelations isn’t exactly a multi-cultural country picnic.
And I’m yet to find anything on the biography of Mohammad depicting him as ‘blood thirsty’ etc, although from my secular atheist perspective, the sole function of the Abrahamic religions was to gain mass control of humanity by any means justifiable in the name of ‘god’. And of course… everything is justifiable in the name of god. From secular humanist perspective that’s blood thirsty by definition.