"The life of Brian " pointed out the absurdity of the interpretation of events 2000 years ago. I understood it and laughed as a very young teenager. I can't believe there are people devoting their lives to that absurdity.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No true Muslim would do that.Presumably they're not real Muslims...
Taliban ban girls from secondary education in Afghanistan
Government announces re-opening of high schools for boys but makes no mention of girlswww.theguardian.com
Does this extend to when people read other books like The Catcher in the Rye and decide to murder people?The bible doesn't explicitly ban the use of condoms, yet the Catholic church has (and possibly still does).
Religious texts are open to interpretation. If someone reads the qu'ran and believes the words instruct them to kill unbelievers, their actions are undoubtedly caused by their faith.
I'm not familiar with the book. Could you please elaborate.Does this extend to when people read other books like The Catcher in the Rye and decide to murder people?
Just a book about a loner going about his life. A bit depressing really but not really violent, more just hopeless. But the guy who killed Lennon said it was his manifesto.I'm not familiar with the book. Could you please elaborate.
No they are not, but what is your point?The mainstream Christian organizations have been forced to change some of their views and practises in line with modern standards.
Groups from certain other religions seem to take more of the approach that they should gain control of sections of society and force them back into barbaric ways.
For example, its unlikely that Gay couples or transgender people will cope well in Afghanistan in the near future.
Iran's Transformation From The 1950s To Today, In Pictures
It’s not a secret that due to its nuclear arsenal and the strict US sanctions against the country, Iran keeps making headings across the world.www.thetravel.com
Are they striving towards bettering the human race?
Personally I think it’s horrific, but what are you trying to convey?Some folks argue that "all cultures are equal".
I'm sorry but any culture that bans half the population from playing sport doesn't deserve to be defended by Western apologists.
And for folks who would claim "it's got nothing to do with Islam", consider the Taliban's reasons and justifications for such a ban. But of course, the belief system is not a factor. It's never a factor. It's because of "geopolitical factors". Or something. Ask JackOutback.
The Taliban is grotesque and religious doctrine is central to its worldview. And some folks say this doctrine is not incompatible with 21st-century, liberal, secular society?
This is medieval bullshit.
Afghan women to be banned from playing sport, Taliban say
National cricket team included in prohibition, as interim government containing no women starts workwww.theguardian.com
Huh? What is your question?Personally I think it’s horrific, but what are you trying to convey?
Does this extend to when people read other books like The Catcher in the Rye and decide to murder people?
Seems like an important distinction.Do the authors and fans/followers of such books claim the text contained within them is the Word of an all-encompassing God?
Do the authors and fans/followers of such books claim the text contained within them is the Word of an all-encompassing God?
Can a non-Muslim claim the Koran made them do it? If not, why not?
Is there anything that stops a non-Muslim from claiming the Koran made them do it?
Do you necessarily have to be a believer to act on the word of God?
Non Muslims do not subscribe to the claim that the words contained in the Quran are the words of God and should be adhered to. The Quran does says, "With the truth we (God) have sent it down and with the truth it has come down.", so we assume that believers assume that what is containd in the Quran is 'truth'. The Quran also frequently asserts in its text that it is divinely ordained to the point where it is believed that it is the literal word of God.
Verse 59 of Surah An-Nisa in the Quran orders believers to obey Allah (the words of Allah are in the Quran) and obey the prophet. "And if you obey him, you will be rightly guided."
I of course believe in no such thing.
Lack of belief that the Quran establishes 'truth'? Certainly whatever action I take in my life is not influenced by the words contained in the Quran.
I personally take no notice of what is purported to be the Word of God by adherents of whatever faith claims such. If someone chooses to act on the words contained in a religious text, then they are either a believer in the truth of such a text, or they are looking for some other sort of easy justification for their action.
The questions were simple.
Going by your logic it shouldn't matter if the person is Muslim or not.
All you have done is demonstrate the logical fallacy of your bullshit.
And I answered them.
I personally take no notice of what is purported to be the Word of God by adherents of whatever faith claims such. Whatever action I take in my life is not influenced by the words contained in the Quran.
I personally take no notice of what is purported to be the Word of God by adherents of whatever faith claims such. Whatever action I take in my life is not influenced by the words contained in the Quran.
Ooooo. "Strawman"? Go on. You know you want to. Must be a couple of months now.
Yeah nah, you didn't.
The simple answer is you wouldn't automatically lay blame for the actions of a non-Muslim on a Muslim book even if that person cited the book as their motivation.
Err, yeah I did.
What's your point exactly?
As I said, non-Muslims do not subscribe to the claim that the words contained in the Quran are the words of God and should be adhered to. Muslims assume that what is contained in the Quran is 'truth' and as such that 'truth' could be used as a possible justification for various actions.
If non-Muslims are using the Quran as justification or explanation for their actions (which I find highly unlikely) then they often do so for reasons other than what might be in that particular text or rely on a extreme and often obscure interpretation of a section of that text or character that supposedly 'inspires' them.
For example the obsessive Mark Chapman, a recently converted Christian, took offense to John Lennon’s atheism. According to one interpretation he saw John Lennon as a phony, because Chapman saw God as real and also because Lennon preached 'imagine no possessions' yet was a millionaire. By killing Lennon, Chapman hoped to save children from emulating Lennon’s godless ways. The main character of 'Catcher in the Rye' Holden Caulfield was to be the "catcher in the rye" who saved children from falling over "some crazy cliff" in which one interpretation symbolised falling into the world of adults mostly made up of the "phonies" (like Lennon) that the main character hated. Chapman supposedly saw himself as the catcher in the rye of his generation, likening himself to Holden Caulfield in a book, which he knew was fiction and not necessarily was the literal 'truth'.
Then again Chapman may have just craved notoriety by killing someone famous, as apparently Paul McCartney, Johnny Carson and Ronald Reagan were also considered as possible targets, but as Chapman said in 2010, Lennon was chosen just out of convenience.
You are making an argument against your own argument by demonstrating that there isn't necessarily/always a direct link between what a book might say and what someone might do based on what they think the book said.
Another part is every Muslim I know takes their guidance from the Koran AND the Hadith, together.
I never said there was always a direct link between "what a book might say and what someone might do based on what they think the book said". I merely commented on the difference between the fiction story of 'Catcher in the Rye' and a work such as 'Quran', whose followrs believe is the literal word of their God.
Dare I say it? Str..wm...n ?
Well yes. So?
You are as bad as, if not worse than, Sweet Jesus.
Yeah ok. As if that actually means anything.
It means that you are as bad as, or worse than, Sweet Jesus.
It means that you are as bad as, or worse than, Sweet Jesus.Yeah ok. As if that actually means anything.
It means that you are as bad as, or worse than, Sweet Jesus.