Why Islam is dangerous

[DogOnPorch]

You copy paste the same words, so it is translated as disbeliever and infidel at the same time.

"Infidel" means just that in English: disbeliever or unbeliever.

Perhaps your cult is so dangerous because it can't get its terminology straight.

Edited September 6, 2016 by DogOnPorch

[Altai]

"Infidel" means just that in English: disbeliever or unbeliever.

Perhaps your cult is so dangerous because it can't get its terminology straight.

Only clever persons can understand it.

It cant mean "disbeliever/unbeliever". Because in Quran, Satan rejects to respect human and Allah asks "why". Satan says "because I am made of fire but this fcking human being is made of mud, which one of us is worth of respect ?, I will do my best to mislead them from your way". Then Allah says "Okay get out of kafir, you are allowed until the Last Judgment".

Satan is called as "kafir" despite knows the existence of Allah.

Now I proved its a wrong translation. The word "kafir" has no such a meaning in the dictionary nor as an interpretation.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Altai

[Guest]

Ofcourse no, there are words with multiple meanings in all languages. This does not mean that you can translate a sentence in many different meanings. You can translate it with the most significant state.

So you believe IslamQA.info is wrong when they state that 2:193 means:

“And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allaah)”

How do you know that your interpretation is correct and that of other Muslims is false?

It is common practice for Christians to use different interpretations or definitions to change the meaning of scriptures as well. I am happy any time followers of any religion are able to find ways to moderate their scripture and align with modern humanist ethics.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Guest

[Altai]

So you believe IslamQA.info is wrong when they state that 2:193 means:

“And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allaah)”

How do you know that your interpretation is correct and that of other Muslims is false?

It is common practice for Christians to use different interpretations or definitions to change the meaning of scriptures as well. I am happy any time followers of any religion are able to find ways to moderate their scripture and align with modern humanist ethics.

You cant translete a sentence in different ways based on its various meanings, because it will be a nonsense if you take apart it from the context. As I said in my pre post, the word kafir also means "who hides somethings". For example farmers are called with the same word because of they hide seeds in the soil. Does it make sense if you translate the word kafir as farmer in Quran verses ? Makes no sense. There is no such a thing that Muslims translate it in many different way, this is what you want to believe but its not in reality.

Below a video for you, if you really want to learn something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sA_JfYc-8Y

[Rue]

Kafir means "hiding" and its used in Quran as the ones who try to hide facts.

It has more than one meaning as you are well aware and the meaning comes from the full context of how it is used.

Don't. Don't try claim the meaning of words in any language let alone Arabic have only one meaning.

That's insulting to those of us who read Arabic.

Khafir, dhimmi, you know exactly what they mean.

This attempt to sanitize what khafir means and deem it to have only one meaning is insulting to Arabic.

Arabic is a fluid language. It flows like water in a river as it takes shaoe and the words take shape with meaning depending on the context in which the word is used.

In fact it is a language built or designed to make it easy to use multiple meanings for almost all Arabic words.

Its a fluid, ever changing, poetic language not a rigid static one.

You show your fundamentalist, rigid belief system by trying to turn it into rigid definitions.

People try do that with English on this forum as well. It fails for the same reasons.

Meaning comes from the context in which a word is used not just in the word itself.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Rue

[Rue]

You cant translete a sentence in different ways based on its various meanings, because it will be a nonsense if you take apart it from the context. As I said in my pre post, the word kafir also means "who hides somethings". For example farmers are called with the same word because of they hide seeds in the soil. Does it make sense if you translate the word kafir as farmer in Quran verses ? Makes no sense. There is no such a thing that Muslims translate it in many different way, this is what you want to believe but its not in reality.

Below a video for you, if you really want to learn something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sA_JfYc-8Y

Wow are you really that brainwashed you believe meaning becomes nonsensical because it can vary. Wow. What a sad way

to go through life thinking you only have one path of possibility. What a narrow, close minded way of approaching language let

alone the Arabic language which was created to lend itself to ever changing meanings.

Wow. Your script or no script? Your meaning or no meaning. How sad. No wonder you repeat blindly certain phrases without questioning

them.

Man I can not imagine going through life only worshipping vanilla ice cream and ignoring the other flavours.

[Altai]

It has more than one meaning as you are well aware and the meaning comes from the full context of how it is used.

Don't. Don't try claim the meaning of words in any language let alone Arabic have only one meaning.

That's insulting to those of us who read Arabic.

Khafir, dhimmi, you know exactly what they mean.

This attempt to sanitize what khafir means and deem it to have only one meaning is insulting to Arabic.

Arabic is a fluid language. It flows like water in a river as it takes shaoe and the words take shape with meaning depending on the context in which the word is used.

In fact it is a language bult or designed to make it easy to use multiple meanings for almost all Arabic words.

Its a fluid, ever changing, poetic language not a rigid static one.

You show your fundamentalist, rigid, indoctrination by trying to turn it into rigid definitions.

People try do that with English on this forum as well. It fails for the same reasons.

Meaning comes from the context in which a word is used not just in the word itself.

Please read my posts again and if you still dont understand, take a rest of 10 minutes, then read it again. Make the same things until you understand it.

By the way, you have been reported for personal attack.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Altai

[Rue]

Kafir in Arabic means "disbeliever" in day to day use as Altai is well aware. It is also used to mean one who does not follow Islam or is without a religion depending on its full contextual reference.

The word can be used in a derogatory way.

Originally Muslims who came under the protection of the Islamic state after fighting and accepting the defeat were referred t as al-mu'ahid (contractees). This meant they agreed to live under the Muslim protection as a result of some peace agreement but as part of that peace agreement they were liable to pay tax.

Non Muslims captured and forced under Muslim law were referred to as al-dhimmi and paid jizyah another form of tax.

Becayse al-dhimmi were not Muslims they had inferior rights and to this day they still do, i.e., can not own land or testify on their own behalf or deal with a Muslim directly in business.

.

Please read my posts again and if you still dont understand, take a rest of 10 minutes, then read it again. Make the same things until you understand it.

By the way, you have been reported for personal attack.

Nothing I said attacked you personally, I challenge your method of giving only one meaning to words.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Rue

[Rue]

Here Altai this is what I am talking about, deriving meaning of words from their

context:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222879070_Deriving_word_meaning_from_written_context_A_process_analysis

http://samvak.tripod.com/context.html

It means more than just assigning one meaning to a word and saying that is all it can mean.

The fact I challenge you on not understanding meaning comes from context is not a personal attack, its a challenge to yout o open your mind to the possibility of a script of meaning other then the one you demand is the only one to follow.

You are no victim. You can however victimize others by thinking in the manner you do. It sets you up for following dogma without questioning it.

You ever question anything or do you just accept it as you are told?

Have you ever given your own meaning to something? Try it.

[Altai]

Kafir in Arabic means "disbeliever" in day to day use as Altai is well aware. It is also used to mean one who does not follow Islam or is without a religion depending on its full contextual reference.

The word can be used in a derogatory way.

Originally Muslims who came under the protection of the Islamic state after fighting and accepting the defeat were referred t as al-mu'ahid (contractees). This meant they agreed to live under the Muslim protection as a result of some peace agreement but as part of that peace agreement they were liable to pay tax.

Non Muslims captured and forced under Muslim law were referred to as al-dhimmi and paid jizyah another form of tax.

Becayse al-dhimmi were not Muslims they had inferior rights and to this day they still do, i.e., can not own land or testify on their own behalf or deal with a Muslim directly in business.

.

Nothing I said attacked you personally, I challenge your method of giving only one meaning to words.

I proved in one of my pre post that it does not mean "disbeliever" because Satan is called as "kafir" in Quran despite knows the existence of Allah.

It also does not mean "who dont follow Islam", because in another verse two different groups called as "the others who given book and kafirs", these both groups does not follow Islam but they are called differently, if it was meant "who dont follow Islam" both group would be called with one word as "kafirs".

Again, I proved you are wrong.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Altai

[Rue]

معنى

المستمدة من

السياق

The above means deriving meaning from co ntext in Arabic.

Its not only a concept in English.

No language in the world is capable of defining meaning without proper context.

Without context in fact we get nonsense or chaos that comes from misunderstanding.

Understanding only one possible use of a word is as bad as not understanding any.

Either way, its close minded.

The more possible meanings you learn a word has, the less likely you will misunderstand

how it is being used.

Today in the Muslim world, rigid fundamentalist interpretation of words in Arabic leads to

the kind of extremist dogma that fuels the Muslim wars with not just non Muslims but fellow

Muslims.

As most of us are aware, the more flexible our minds are to the possibility of more than one meaning

the more intelligent we can become.

Our brain has an infinite capacity to flex and incorporate new meanings if we let it.

If I were to take an mri of the brain of someone who is a creative thinker you will see what looks like

a tree of thick branches or neuro transmission network.

If I were to take an mri of the brain of someone who has not developed his critical thinking, you

will find that same part of the brain has no thick branches and maybe not even any branches.

Creativity, abstraction, critical analysis is what causes us to move past primal reflex and move

from simple simeon or ape to an animal that can evolve past simply eating and killing and

making ape like noises in unison and following alpha males.

[Michael Hardner]

Folks - please step back from the personal comments.

I'm going to consider 'indoctrinated' to be a personal comment & insult moving forward - it relays a lack of respect for the person.

Also - do not comment on reporting or moderation as that is off topic. Just report a post and ignore it if you consider it out of bounds.

Any questions or concerns - please report, or PM. Don't post in this thread about moderation or your posts will be removed.

Thank you.

[Rue]

I proved in my one of my pre post that it does not mean "disbeliever" because Satan is called as "kafir" in Quran despite knows the existence of Allah.

It also does not mean "who dont follow Islam", because in another verse two different groups called as "the others who given book and kafirs", these both groups does not follow Islam but they are called differently, if it was meant "who dont follow Islam" both group would be called with one word as "kafirs".

Again, I proved you are wrong.

No on the contrary all you have done is say your meaning is the only one. The fact that the word is used in the manner you say itis, which is true, does not mean its not used in other ways.

In fact its silly to try pretend it only has the meaning you say it is. Just because you feel it has only one meaning does not mean that's the only one.

All you'd done is restate your meaning, you haven't disproved it can have other meanings.

Challenge yourself. There's more than one river to swim down.

[Altai]

No on the contrary all you have done is say your meaning is the only one. The fact that the word is used in the manner you say itis, which is true, does not mean its not used in other ways.

In fact its silly to try pretend it only has the meaning you say it is. Just because you feel it has only one meaning does not mean that's the only one.

All you'd done is restate your meaning, you haven't disproved it can have other meanings.

Challenge yourself. There's more than one river to swim down.

So now you are denying the logic. You claim it maybe translated in different ways even if it make no sense.

[Rue]

I removed the word indoctrination from an earlier post.

The word means a method of learning that imbues just one meaning. Giving just one meaning to a word is exactly what I am

challenging. Its a method, a process of defining words I am challenging not a person.

Hope that clarifies it and ironically it shows how when a word is removed from its actual context, takes on a new meaning

depending on the new context its given, in this case a negative one.

If anything the term "brainwashing" I used which was only meant to challenge one way of thinking is I can see insulting so I apologize for that.

[Rue]

So now you are denying the logic. You claim it maybe translated in different ways even if it make no sense.

No I am not denying logic but I am n ow stating the above comment by you is illogical.

I am saying its not logical to believe a word can only have one meaning, that being the meaning you declare.

It is illogical to believe reality or understanding of meaning comes from only your method of interpretation.

Logic is about deriving or creating principles of reasoning, its about creating methods of argument.

What I am saying is logic is the creation of methods of reasoning to create meaning using the construction of multiple forms of arguments.

There is no one way to obtain meaning, In fact in logic an argument is considered " valid" when one can sh ow a specific relation of logical support between the assumptions of the argument and its conclusion.

In your method of argument or logic you aspouse or advocate the existence of only one definition or meaning or sense or reality.

That to me is illogical.

In fact I believe when you close your mind to all but your own definition or meaning you cease to be logical but embrace fundamentalism

an entrenched belief in only one method of interpretation of meaning.

I tend to prefer the approaches of Taoists, Hindus and Bhuddists and certain mystics in Judaism and other paths of thnking in search of meaning

who see reality as an endless possibility of many realities that co-exist at the same time and some refer to as illusions.

I embrace quantitative physics that suggests there are multiple plains of reality or dimensions existing at the same time.

I embrace dictionaries that give more than one meaning to a word.

Call me crazy but I can't imagine your definition is the only one. That would limit life. I don't see life as limited to a narrow path or script given to me to memorize and regurgitate. I don't use scripts to tell me how I must think and lead me to the false belief there is only one way to arrive at

meaning or God or whatever you wish to call it.

Many religions teach their followers there is only one way. Sorry not for me. I push. I flex. I create. I challenge. I never sit and eat the same

thing over and over.

You really believe sense only exists when you say it does based on your script?

You think you are the only television show on t.v.?

Really?

[Altai]

I removed the word indoctrination from an earlier post.

The word means a method of learning that imbues just one meaning. Giving just one meaning to a word is exactly what I am

challenging. Its a method, a process of defining words I am challenging not a person.

Hope that clarifies it and ironically it shows how when a word is removed from its actual context, takes on a new meaning

depending on the new context its given, in this case a negative one.

If anything the term "brainwashing" I used which was only meant to challenge one way of thinking is I can see insulting so I apologize for that.

No I dont mean the term "brainwashing", I am just disturbed by to be targeted personally. Anyway.

No I dont give one meaning to a word, I give the most logical meaning according to the usage in the sentence.

[Altai]

No I am not denying logic but I am n ow stating the above comment by you is illogical.

I am saying its not logical to believe a word can only have one meaning, that being the meaning you declare.

It is illogical to believe reality or understanding of meaning comes from only your method of interpretation.

Logic is about deriving or creating principles of reasoning, its about creating methods of argument.

What I am saying is logic is the creation of methods of reasoning to create meaning using the construction of multiple forms of arguments.

There is no one way to obtain meaning, In fact in logic an argument is considered " valid" when one can sh ow a specific relation of logical support between the assumptions of the argument and its conclusion.

In your method of argument or logic you aspouse or advocate the existence of only one definition or meaning or sense or reality.

That to me is illogical.

In fact I believe when you close your mind to all but your own definition or meaning you cease to be logical but embrace fundamentalism

an entrenched belief in only one method of interpretation of meaning.

I tend to prefer the approaches of Taoists, Hindus and Bhuddists and certain mystics in Judaism and other paths of thnking in search of meaning

who see reality as an endless possibility of many realities that co-exist at the same time and some refer to as illusions.

I embrace quantitative physics that suggests there are multiple plains of reality or dimensions existing at the same time.

I embrace dictionaries that give more than one meaning to a word.

Call me crazy but I can't imagine your definition is the only one. That would limit life. I don't see life as limited to a narrow path or script given to me to memorize and regurgitate. I don't use scripts to tell me how I must think and lead me to the false belief there is only one way to arrive at

meaning or God or whatever you wish to call it.

Many religions teach their followers there is only one way. Sorry not for me. I push. I flex. I create. I challenge. I never sit and eat the same

thing over and over.

You really believe sense only exists when you say it does based on your script?

You think you are the only television show on t.v.?

Really?

I really dont understand what you are trying to do. I proved that the verses makes no sense when we translate them with the meanings which you claim.

[Rue]

For all the above reasons I have stated I believe Islam is dangerous when it leads followers to believe there is only one method to purse life and if you do not follow that method you are an obstacle to be removed.

I believe this is what is fueling Muslim on Muslim violence as we speak across the world against not just non Muslims but Muslims.

I believe all religions including my own Judaism and Christianity are equally dangerous when used the same way and they have been and can be.

In the case of Islam I argue until it reforms itself and develops critical thinking as a mainstream process to find more then one meaning per word, it will stay entrenched in a world of rigid intolerance.

We have in Canada critical Muslim thinkers. For me they are the future not Muslim terrorists.

Then again I don't sacrifice goats, believe in virgins waiting for me or worship Lucifer.

I think men with beards and sandals can be problematic.

Show me a holy man, chances are he's a pedophile. Excuse me but I don't much trust

any organized religion. Its not the religion, its the people in its structures of power I don't like.

I prefer animals.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Rue

[Rue]

No I dont mean the term "brainwashing", I am just disturbed by to be targeted personally. Anyway.

No I dont give one meaning to a word, I give the most logical meaning according to the usage in the sentence.

Well I am debating you. I am genuinely sorry if you think I was attacking you. I am just debating. All I am saying is there is more than one meaning.and having fun debating. I love debating. If I was attacking you personally I would say you look like a rabbit. However sorry if it sounds harsh. Its just debate.

I disagree with you but that is good...argument means we are alive.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Rue

[Benz]

The most dangerous religion, according to your logic, is our christian neighbors. The USA are the strongest super power with the biggest number of nuclear missiles and one of the worst foreign policies in the world. The Americans are making war in their own economical interests at the expensive of democracies, people's lives and societies. They have no conscience problems of what-so-ever to start a war based on lies and they only ask the blessing of god for their actions. Because they are the strongest, they are the most dangerous one. Well, from a local point of view, it's true that if you are located in a country that is not on the path of their ambitions, the danger is not imminent. Relativity!

However, you are rather trying to support your argument on the content of that specific religion. You are taking sections of the Coran and point the finger at it. Even if the content was more barbaric than any other religions, it does not make that religion more dangerous than any other. It's the power of the followers that will determine the level of danger.

You can find in the Bible, almost as much stupidities as you would in the Coran. Both are violent, both are based on very old thinking. If it is true that you can find more extremists per followers in Islam vs Christians today, it was not always like that throughout history. Back in the Crusades, or inquisitions, or Massacre de la Saint-Barthélmy, it was not safe to hang around Christians or the "good branch" of Christians if you were not one of them. Jews were safer among the Muslims. The content of those religions did not change. The current extremist groups you can find among the Islam are relatively new and can be explain by some actions done by the western world.

Which leads us to the Islamists specifically. They have their own interpretation of the Coran to a point that we should talk about two different religions. The extreme differences are so major that it wipes away all their similarities. They are rather politic than spiritual.

I think it is pointless and not constructive to elaborate on the degree of dangerousness one can be against another. It's not important. Long time ago, religions were the lighthouse of morality in a world where leaders were the sovereigns of the people and had the unique goal to ensure their powers. Now that the people are sovereign and have legal system, laws and constitutions to protect their values and morals, the religions are trailing behind and are rather leveling to the bottom the people's values.

But the people have the right to believe and practice their religions. As long as it is confined to the cult places and private sphere, it is not a problem to one.

[Altai]

For all the above reasons I have stated I believe Islam is dangerous when it leads followers to believe there is only one method to purse life and if you do not follow that method you are an obstacle to be removed.

I believe this is what is fueling Muslim on Muslim violence as we speak across the world against not just non Muslims but Muslims.

I believe all religions including my own Judaism and Christianity are equally dangerous when used the same way and they have been and can be.

In the case of Islam I argue until it reforms itself and develops critical thinking as a mainstream process to find more then one meaning per word, it will stay entrenched in a world of rigid intolerance.

We have in Canada critical Muslim thinkers. For me they are the future not Muslim terrorists.

Then again I don't sacrifice goats, believe in virgins waiting for me or worship Lucifer.

I think men with beards and sandals can be problematic.

Show me a holy man, chances are he's a pedophile. Excuse me but I don't much trust

any organized religion. Its not the religion, its the people in its structures of power I don't like.

I prefer animals.

We have discussed these things before.

Islam encourages people to think about life. There are many verses about it. You are wrong one more time.

[Rue]

I really dont understand what you are trying to do. I proved that the verses makes no sense when we translate them with the meanings which you claim.

I am saying not all the time. Yes in some cases, no in others. I get your argument I do. People do the same thing with the Talmud. They take the words and read them literally and therefore misunderstand the meaning.

I get part of your argument. People most certainly misconstrue or misquote the Koran to give it meanings you may think untrue and others do.

I get that. I get you feel the Koran is misinterpreted like I do the Talmud. I get that. There are certain phrases out of respect to you I would defer to you to tell me how you interpret them and understand that is your views of the words and respect you for that but my problem is the Koran today is not read in a uniform manner. It fact its meaning changes all the time depending on the sect, the Mullahs in the sect, etc.

I reject those using the Koran to justify violent meanings with words from the Koran..the very same words you would argue don't have those meanings.

The Bible, The Koran, you know as well as I do, their meaning changes depending on who interprets them.

If you use the Koran to be peaceful I applaud you. I f you use it to justify hatred and war, I reject your beliefs.

You should do the same with me. If I use the Torah or Talmud to justify war or hatred, you have the right to reject my beliefs.

I say the above for argument. I don't mean it personally. I am just giving hypotheticals, I mean to say, any of us, if we interpret our

religion to condone or justify violence and war and intolerance, we are savages, idiots.

If we use the words to learn to treat each other the way we want to be treated, then great.

I do not see Palestinians as an enemy of Israelis or vice versa. I see terrorists, extremists of any side, the enemy for

preventing peace.

Islam is good and bad depending on who uses it and how. Likewise, Judaism and every other religion.

What I am saying is more often then not, men take over religions ( I am one so I am being honest) and use them

as weapons to kill others.

[Rue]

Benz I have tried to answer you directly as well. Benz I will say this. Right now as a Jew living with Christians for the most part is problem free. Every now and then I see one put mayonaisse on a bagel and eat it with ham and I get upset but other then that and this wierd tendency they have to

not match their checkers and stripes and for the most part I can handle them.

Right now, where I live I have Muslim. Siekh, Christian neighbours and they are for the most part o.k. until they get in cars.

Seriously though-Islam is at the present time hijacked by extremists in the Middle East and elsewhere. To pretend it is not is absurd. Its not a justification to hate all Muslims or stereotype them all as terrorist no but to pretend Muslim extremism does not have the Muslim world by the balls so to speak and prevent it from evolving peacefully is pointless.

Muslim fundamentalism for me is a problem yes for the same reason it is with my own religion.

[Altai]

I am saying not all the time. Yes in some cases, no in others. I get your argument I do. People do the same thing with the Talmud. They take the words and read them literally and therefore misunderstand the meaning.

I get part of your argument. People most certainly misconstrue or misquote the Koran to give it meanings you may think untrue and others do.

I get that. I get you feel the Koran is misinterpreted like I do the Talmud. I get that. There are certain phrases out of respect to you I would defer to you to tell me how you interpret them and understand that is your views of the words and respect you for that but my problem is the Koran today is not read in a uniform manner. It fact its meaning changes all the time depending on the sect, the Mullahs in the sect, etc.

I reject those using the Koran to justify violent meanings with words from the Koran..the very same words you would argue don't have those meanings.

The Bible, The Koran, you know as well as I do, their meaning changes depending on who interprets them.

If you use the Koran to be peaceful I applaud you. I f you use it to justify hatred and war, I reject your beliefs.

You should do the same with me. If I use the Torah or Talmud to justify war or hatred, you have the right to reject my beliefs.

I say the above for argument. I don't mean it personally. I am just giving hypotheticals, I mean to say, any of us, if we interpret our

religion to condone or justify violence and war and intolerance, we are savages, idiots.

If we use the words to learn to treat each other the way we want to be treated, then great.

I do not see Palestinians as an enemy of Israelis or vice versa. I see terrorists, extremists of any side, the enemy for

preventing peace.

Islam is good and bad depending on who uses it and how. Likewise, Judaism and every other religion.

What I am saying is more often then not, men take over religions ( I am one so I am being honest) and use them

as weapons to kill others.

You cant understand the verses as you wish based on various meanings of some words. You have to take them properly with their context. The word kafir can also be used to describe "farmers" and you can translate the verses with this meaning. Then verses makes no sense. You cant claim you are a Muslim because you translate it wrong.

You claim that even if you translate it as "farmers", this makes them "bad muslims", not "non-muslims".

Edited September 6, 2016 by Altai