Islam

[nt250]

I've only been here about a week or so.

Anyone interested in discussing Islam?

I am not a fan of this sorry excuse for a religion.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I've only been here about a week or so.

Anyone interested in discussing Islam?

I am not a fan of this sorry excuse for a religion.

One of the most interesting things is that there's lots of evidence that Mohammed took a previously "existing" moon god from the pantheistic religion of the time and made him over into allah.

It's also interesting that there parts of the quran were later retracted and mohammed claimed they were made under the influence of satan. LOL. Some of these were when Mohammed started talking about the Allah's daughters, (actually relatives of the moon god he was trying to make over).

 

[nt250]

One of the most interesting things is that there's lots of evidence that Mohammed took a previously "existing" moon god from the pantheistic religion of the time and made him over into allah.

It's also interesting that there parts of the quran were later retracted and mohammed claimed they were made under the influence of satan. LOL. Some of these were when Mohammed started talking about the Allah's daughters, (actually relatives of the moon god he was trying to make over).

Muhammad was a smart guy. He saw this new religion called "Chistianity" and he thought " I can do that", and he did.

Muhammad created the perfect religion. It allows a Muslim man to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, to whoever he wants, as long as he can say it's in defense of Islam. Not Allah, or God, but Islam itself. And everything is in defense of Islam.

It's quite the racket.

 

[Diuretic]

Read some history before you display your ignorance.

The West as we know it wouldn't be here were it not for Islam.

Now prove me wrong, you know you want to.

Oh and on religions, I don't care either way, religion is organised superstition so as you Americans say I don't have a dog in this hunt.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Read some history before you display your ignorance.

The West as we know it wouldn't be here were it not for Islam.

Now prove me wrong, you know you want to.

Oh and on religions, I don't care either way, religion is organised superstition so as you Americans say I don't have a dog in this hunt.

But yet all major scientific innovations have come from the west. Islamic countries are stuck in the 7th century. They did some good things, then they stopped.

 

[theHawk]

Read some history before you display your ignorance.

The West as we know it wouldn't be here were it not for Islam.

Now prove me wrong, you know you want to.

Oh and on religions, I don't care either way, religion is organised superstition so as you Americans say I don't have a dog in this hunt.

How about you prove your own statements? What do you mean by the West as we know it wouldn't be here? If you're referring to the fact Islam helped "shape" the West by its invasions and wars, then yes they did.

 

[Diuretic]

But yet all major scientific innovations have come from the west. Islamic countries are stuck in the 7th century. They did some good things, then they stopped.

Fair point. I know I'm generalising but it seems to me that most of the west's scientific innovations came after the Enlightenment, when the iron grip of both the Church and the Establishment (monarchy) began to be loosened.
The Islamic scholars kept alive the ancient learning, in particular Aristotle (I know you know this, I'm thinking as I type) and it was Aristotle that laid the path for modern science. We know that Aristotle was admired by the Islamic scholars - and of course Aquinas learned of Aristotle from those scholars and, ironically enough, used Aristotle to defeat - intellectually - the ideas of Islam.

But yes, you are quite right. Somewhere Islam got locked into a mediaeval time warp and I have no idea what happened to do that. Was it a fundamentalism? I know that Islam had major ideological differences after the death of the Prophet hence the Sunni/Shia split but I also think there were other schisms as well, I simply don't know enough about Islam yet to say I understand how it happened. I do think that the more conservative forms of Islam have won though, in recent years I mean. There was a liberal strain of Islam that tried to modernise but was defeated. Some of that was due to the West in modern times (I'm thinking of Nasser in Egypt for example). I am also wondering why the west didn't help the more liberal Islamic thinkers. Different thread I suppose.

 

[Diuretic]

How about you prove your own statements? What do you mean by the West as we know it wouldn't be here? If you're referring to the fact Islam helped "shape" the West by its invasions and wars, then yes they did.

Well here's one. Science would not exist as we know it if it weren't for the Islamic scholars who protected the ancient knowledge. I've already indicated that in the discussion with RWA but if you wish I can enlarge upon it if you're at all interested.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Fair point. I know I'm generalising but it seems to me that most of the west's scientific innovations came after the Enlightenment, when the iron grip of both the Church and the Establishment (monarchy) began to be loosened.
The Islamic scholars kept alive the ancient learning, in particular Aristotle (I know you know this, I'm thinking as I type) and it was Aristotle that laid the path for modern science. We know that Aristotle was admired by the Islamic scholars - and of course Aquinas learned of Aristotle from those scholars and, ironically enough, used Aristotle to defeat - intellectually - the ideas of Islam.

But yes, you are quite right. Somewhere Islam got locked into a mediaeval time warp and I have no idea what happened to do that. Was it a fundamentalism? I know that Islam had major ideological differences after the death of the Prophet hence the Sunni/Shia split but I also think there were other schisms as well, I simply don't know enough about Islam yet to say I understand how it happened. I do think that the more conservative forms of Islam have won though, in recent years I mean. There was a liberal strain of Islam that tried to modernise but was defeated. Some of that was due to the West in modern times (I'm thinking of Nasser in Egypt for example). I am also wondering why the west didn't help the more liberal Islamic thinkers. Different thread I suppose.

I can tell you the answer. The New World Order totalitarians recognized islam could be a potent vehicle for suppression, and thus aided and abetted fundamentalism in those nations. The Islamists are the noahide army of god which will eventually be used to kill all the christians.

 

[theHawk]

Please do elaborate. I'd really like to know how the religion of Islam effected scientific minds in the middle east, and the west.

 

[Diuretic]

Please do elaborate. I'd really like to know how the religion of Islam effected scientific minds in the middle east, and the west.

You could try here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avicenna.
There's a lot more we can discuss but it's really not open to disputation so if you simply want to denounce Islam without reading about it then let me know now and we can avoid wasting time.

 

[theHawk]

I fail to see the connection between Islam and what this one man did. It sounds to me like he was born a child prodogy, I fail to see how his religion can take credit for what is one man accomplished in his life.

This is supposed to be a disscusion on a religion, not of individual men who happened to be a certain religion. Its like saying the Catholic church should take credit for all of Einstein's work. So do not come here, and tell me that I need to "read up on the religion." I know that it was created all by one man, a pedophile and warmonger. I know that Muslims can't get there story straight when it comes to Jesus. They claim they love him as a prophet of God, yet turn around and throw out the accounts of Jesus's own Disciples (I guess Jesus was a true prophet of God, but didn't know his own prophets would write "lies" about him after his death). And we all know that the Qu'ran can easily be perverted to justify waging war and murdering others.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Well here's one. Science would not exist as we know it if it weren't for the Islamic scholars who protected the ancient knowledge. I've already indicated that in the discussion with RWA but if you wish I can enlarge upon it if you're at all interested.

Do you really think that the West would not have made scientific discoveries without it? I contend that we would have done just fine eventually either way. It just might have initially taken a bit longer, but in the end, we would be where we are anyway.

 

[CSM]

Do you really think that the West would not have made scientific discoveries without it? I contend that we would have done just fine eventually either way. It just might have initially taken a bit longer, but in the end, we would be where we are anyway.

I am not sure, but it seems to me that it was the Muslims that destroyed the library at Alexandria so who can say where we would be if they had NOT done that. The West could possibly be even further along scientifically than it is.

 

[Abbey Normal]

I am not sure, but it seems to me that it was the Muslims that destroyed the library at Alexandria so who can say where we would be if they had NOT done that. The West could possibly be even further along scientifically than it is.

 

[no1tovote4]

Fair point. I know I'm generalising but it seems to me that most of the west's scientific innovations came after the Enlightenment, when the iron grip of both the Church and the Establishment (monarchy) began to be loosened.
The Islamic scholars kept alive the ancient learning, in particular Aristotle (I know you know this, I'm thinking as I type) and it was Aristotle that laid the path for modern science. We know that Aristotle was admired by the Islamic scholars - and of course Aquinas learned of Aristotle from those scholars and, ironically enough, used Aristotle to defeat - intellectually - the ideas of Islam.

But yes, you are quite right. Somewhere Islam got locked into a mediaeval time warp and I have no idea what happened to do that. Was it a fundamentalism? I know that Islam had major ideological differences after the death of the Prophet hence the Sunni/Shia split but I also think there were other schisms as well, I simply don't know enough about Islam yet to say I understand how it happened. I do think that the more conservative forms of Islam have won though, in recent years I mean. There was a liberal strain of Islam that tried to modernise but was defeated. Some of that was due to the West in modern times (I'm thinking of Nasser in Egypt for example). I am also wondering why the west didn't help the more liberal Islamic thinkers. Different thread I suppose.

The thing of it is they held it in their knowledge but didn't advance that knowledge...

A great knowledge bank, but not a flood of anything new.

It even seemed to stagnate other groups of people, like Egypt, where before Islam there was a huge font of new discovery and knowledge.

 

[nt250]

Read some history before you display your ignorance.

The West as we know it wouldn't be here were it not for Islam.

Now prove me wrong, you know you want to.

Oh and on religions, I don't care either way, religion is organised superstition so as you Americans say I don't have a dog in this hunt.

Congratulations, I've been posting about Islam for almost 3 years now that that is the studiest reply I've gotten so far.

I'm an atheist, so I'm going to pull out the old "extraordianary claims require extraordinary proof" argument and ask you to please explain what your statement "The West as we know it wouldn't be here were it not for Islam" means.

Other than a lot of dead people.

 

[Gunny]

Fair point. I know I'm generalising but it seems to me that most of the west's scientific innovations came after the Enlightenment, when the iron grip of both the Church and the Establishment (monarchy) began to be loosened.
The Islamic scholars kept alive the ancient learning, in particular Aristotle (I know you know this, I'm thinking as I type) and it was Aristotle that laid the path for modern science. We know that Aristotle was admired by the Islamic scholars - and of course Aquinas learned of Aristotle from those scholars and, ironically enough, used Aristotle to defeat - intellectually - the ideas of Islam.

But yes, you are quite right. Somewhere Islam got locked into a mediaeval time warp and I have no idea what happened to do that. Was it a fundamentalism? I know that Islam had major ideological differences after the death of the Prophet hence the Sunni/Shia split but I also think there were other schisms as well, I simply don't know enough about Islam yet to say I understand how it happened. I do think that the more conservative forms of Islam have won though, in recent years I mean. There was a liberal strain of Islam that tried to modernise but was defeated. Some of that was due to the West in modern times (I'm thinking of Nasser in Egypt for example). I am also wondering why the west didn't help the more liberal Islamic thinkers. Different thread I suppose.

I guess what "enquiring minds wanna know is" why is it whenever I hear this argument, it is always followed by tales of a culture that may have at one time been trend-setting, but has been stuck in that same "trend" since the 7th century?

What Islam was when we were young-n-dumb savages and what Islam still is while we have surpassed it by centuries have two VERY different applications.

In short, what Islam was doesn't mean squat today. What Islam IS, does.

 

[Diuretic]

I am not sure, but it seems to me that it was the Muslims that destroyed the library at Alexandria so who can say where we would be if they had NOT done that. The West could possibly be even further along scientifically than it is.

Damn good point. It was barbarism of the highest order. Luckily after the First Caliph some knowledge was protected by Muslim scholars, primarily in what we now know as Spain but that original book-burning was a blight on humanity, for sure.

 

[Diuretic]

The thing of it is they held it in their knowledge but didn't advance that knowledge...

A great knowledge bank, but not a flood of anything new.

It even seemed to stagnate other groups of people, like Egypt, where before Islam there was a huge font of new discovery and knowledge.

Okay I see your point but I think that human knowledge was advanced, it wasn't all just left like a stagnant pool. They worked with, for example, Aristotelian logic, that enabled the Christian scholars to pick up from them later. I'm not being obstructionist here, just trying to make the point that there was no single "Islamic" approach.