Biggest threat to World peace

[Cyclops]

I really enjoy your posts Lestat, may I comment on this one?

Originally posted by Lestat

At one stage yes there was. Under the Sultan Haroun Al-Rashid intellectual debate in the Ottaman Empire was encouraged.

I think Haroun Al-Rashid was an Abbasid Caliph based in Baghdad (famously portrayed in the "Thousand Nights and a Night") and lived 3 or 4 centuries before the rise of the sons of Othman. The Ottomans themselves were highly practical (eg adopting many Byzantine practices) but intellectually dead and in the end extremely repressive of free thought.

Even then the scholarly debate was limited to a handful of scholars (as in pre-enlightenment Europe, they were shackled by general illiteracy and a conservative regime).

Europe only really took off intellectually when people rejected religion as the centre of their world view and started to think outside the square they inherited.

Originally posted by Lestat
"Do not judge other peoples beliefs...for who are you to judge"

The Qu'ran definitely judges between religions, according first place to Islam, a secondary position to Christians and Jews, and third place to the rest. It also sets out a pretty conservative society with women given less authority than men (even their legal testimony counts for less), severe restrictions on commerce (no interest-how would our econmy go?).

I don't think a truly Qu'ranic society would fly, we've moved on from the days of the prophet, so much so that much of what he said is hard to understand (hence the disagreement and the multiplicity of schools).

 

[Fire Storm]

Biggest threat to world peace is Man himself.

 

[Lestat]

Originally posted by Mark Rudd
Biggest threat to world peace is Man himself.

Spot on!

 

[ah_19]

The Qu'ran definitely judges between religions, according first place to Islam, a secondary position to Christians and Jews, and third place to the rest. It also sets out a pretty conservative society with women given less authority than men (even their legal testimony counts for less), severe restrictions on commerce (no interest-how would our econmy go?).

I don't think a truly Qu'ranic society would fly, we've moved on from the days of the prophet, so much so that much of what he said is hard to understand (hence the disagreement and the multiplicity of schools).

Judging against religions, in a sense yes, because the people of the religions had corrupted the books, so how can they still be the right religion, however judging against the prophets, definantly not. Even the prophet muhamed(s) is the most influential person in the history of the world, the koran states that no prophet is above another, for they have all been given something unique.

Islam is first, as that is the most pure of the messages of the prophets, muhamed(s) ws born after the message of jesus(w) was corrupted, but jesus(w) came after the message of moses(w) was corrupted. Its not about judging one religion against another, simply the extent to which the original message applies, for they are all the same religion, just that people tampered with them, except for the koran.

Women are given less authority within society yes, but that doesnt make them less than men, or inferior, god has stated the reason is, that someone must be in charge, and for that reason alone the man is elevated above the women in some aspects. This never stopped Aisha (the prophets last wife) becoming the greatest islamic scolar for 3 generations, or the prophets first wife being a merchant, it just meant that man is the center of the hosehold, new age power sharing just doesnt work.

as for interest? how would society function without it, much much better. i would estimate 95% of people are enslaved to some degree by interest, not because they have to, but because thats the system thats chosen in the west, chosen for the specific purpose of plundering money from the poor/middle class to the elite. Has interest ever benefited you? unless youre a millionare i doubt it, so why have it when you dont need it. very easy to stop, back money with something, make X dollars equate to Y grams of gold, and all done.

do a search in good for "a phone call to the fed" to find out why the system is the way it is, its certainly not for your benefit

 

[Katthawk]

Originally posted by Mark Rudd
Biggest threat to world peace is Man himself.

Oh how so few words can say so much.

 

[dan warna]

I think we all concur on that,

its just "which man" is the one we should be on the look is the basis of much of the arguments on most of the forums...

and before you reply, that was my feeb attempt at humour, i did understand your post, mostly anyhoo

 

[Cyclops]

Originally posted by ah_19
Judging against religions, in a sense yes, because the people of the religions had corrupted the books, so how can they still be the right religion, however judging against the prophets, definantly not. Even the prophet muhamed(s) is the most influential person in the history of the world, the koran states that no prophet is above another, for they have all been given something unique.

...that's the prophets accepted by Islam.

Originally posted by ah_19
Islam is first, as that is the most pure of the messages of the prophets, muhamed(s) ws born after the message of jesus(w) was corrupted, but jesus(w) came after the message of moses(w) was corrupted. Its not about judging one religion against another, simply the extent to which the original message applies, for they are all the same religion, just that people tampered with them, except for the koran.

...begging the question there, as Christians and Jews don't accept Mahummed as a Prophet at all, and claim Islam has corrupted the message.

Originally posted by ah_19
Women are given less authority within society yes, but that doesnt make them less than men, or inferior,

...oh yes it does, it says they can't be believed in a court of law, they can't inherit as much, and they can't hold power.

[/B][/QUOTE] god has stated the reason is, that someone must be in charge, and for that reason alone the man is elevated above the women in some aspects.[/B][/QUOTE]

I don't believe in a God who grants political power on the basis of the shape of your genitals.

Originally posted by ah_19
This never stopped Aisha (the prophets last wife) becoming the greatest islamic scolar for 3 generations, or the prophets first wife being a merchant, it just meant that man is the center of the hosehold, new age power sharing just doesnt work.

I can accept that in primityive societies division of labour and authority made for a greater chance for a sciety to survive as a group. So did cannibalism, infanticide and intolerance of homosexuality (ie forcing everyone tyo reproduce). There is no place for these primitive relicts in a decent human society.

Originally posted by ah_19
as for interest? how would society function without it, much much better. i would estimate 95% of people are enslaved to some degree by interest, not because they have to, but because thats the system thats chosen in the west, chosen for the specific purpose of plundering money from the poor/middle class to the elite. Has interest ever benefited you? unless youre a millionare i doubt it, so why have it when you dont need it. very easy to stop, back money with something, make X dollars equate to Y grams of gold, and all done.

Interest is one of the underpinnings of international commerce, not just capitalism but any form of broadscale trade. Interest attracts liquid capital which vastly increases a producers ability to provide material to changing markets. The European trade boom (fuelled partly by Iberian imperialism) lead to world domination and cultural hegemony. That's been good to me, although pretty rough on non-Europeans, so it needs to change.

Originally posted by ah_19
do a search in good for "a phone call to the fed" to find out why the system is the way it is, its certainly not for your benefit

Any system is only as good as the people who work it. All the world views have faults and flaws, Islam, Western Liberal Democracy, Communism, etc etc.

I think Islam is a flawed system, but it works because of millions of decent good hearted people who keep faith with the Qu'ran and don't get caught up in the negative possibilities.

Likewise Western Democracies work despite the nasty side of capitalism which can devour people like they were bugs.

 

[dan warna]

yes and the bible is full of crap also.

its just that we pick and ch paragraphs we read, and which we choose to ignore.

 

[Lestat]

...that's the prophets accepted by Islam.

And which prophets are not accepted by Islam??

Remember....the Quran tells us that there are hundreds of prophets....and not all of them are named in the Quran. There are prophets that we do not even know of.

So could you please tell me of these 'prophets that are not accepted by Islam'...

Which prophets??

...oh yes it does, it says they can't be believed in a court of law, they can't inherit as much, and they can't hold power.

Thats actually not true...a women testimony is believed and accepted in a court of law...I'm actually curious as to where you got that idea from. Agreed though...a womans testimony is not seen as equal as that of a man...however...for you to say that 'they can't be believed in a court of law' is in fact incorrect. Perhaps today this is the case in some predominantly muslim countries...but if so..then they are going against the teachings of the Quran.

A woman has the right to own property....the right to vote...the right to demand a divorce...all these are rights which were denied women by the Bible.

Yes...women do recieve less inheritance then men...but the reason for this is that men are seen as the main breadwinners. Any money that a man earns belongs to his family...whereas it is stated that any money that the woman earns is HER money..she is under no obligation to contribute this money to the running of the family/household....however she may contribute if she chooses too?

Could you please reference the surah and verse which led you to this conclusion that woman are not to be believed in a Sharia court???

Just out of curiousity...have you read the Quran? If so...which translation??

 

[GuruJane]

Originally posted by dan warna
he was white house chief of staff, and before that a he was the head USA administrator for NATO did you read the bio ?

and the US continued to bomb long after saigon fell when he was defence secretary

also have you read any of what hitler has written or said?

he might have been an occultist (speculation) but he invoked god and christianity to justify his actions.

meanwhile still no WMDs while the USA has REFUSED to give iraq a one person one vote electoral system. so much for democracy.

hasn't stopped the US and haliburton stealing the oil has it?

You shld watch the West Wing then you'd realise White House COSs have nothing to do with ordering napalmings. Nato wasn't engaged in the Viet War. Stop spoiling yr arguments by being silly. You read like a howard dean supporter.

 

[Bombers 2003]

Lestat.
While i dont disagree with what u say to Cyclops,many people assume because in some Muslim countries,including Egypt,that female testimony in court is disregarded and denigrated that the Qur'an says women testify without lying in court.
Any view on this Frodo et al?.

 

[GuruJane]

Originally posted by ah_19
Its not about judging one religion against another, simply the extent to which the original message applies, for they are all the same religion, just that people tampered with them, except for the koran.

Ah, the sweet arrogance of the True Believer.

 

[Lestat]

Originally posted by Bombers 2003
Lestat.
While i dont disagree with what u say to Cyclops,many people assume because in some Muslim countries,including Egypt,that female testimony in court is disregarded and denigrated that the Qur'an says women testify without lying in court.
Any view on this Frodo et al?.

Egypt is not a good example of a muslim country...I know, I'm Egyptian.

Egypt is probably one of the worst examples of what an Islamic state should be.

About 10 years ago...the when the mufti of Cairo returned from Europe...the press asked him about what he thought about the ethics and morals of the European.

His reply.....

"In Europe I saw many Islamic countries...with no muslims...and I have now returned to a non-Islamic country....full of muslims. "

Needless to say it didn't go down to well with the locals....I believe he was replaced later that year.

There is a whole chapter in the Koran regarding woman....and in it all the rights of women are clearly stipulated. The surah (Chapter) name is 'Woman'(go figure)....don't take my word for it...read it, and you'll be surprised.

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by GuruJane
Ah, the sweet arrogance of the True Believer.

Or blind stupidity perhaps.

 

[Lestat]

Originally posted by Frodo
Or blind stupidity perhaps.

You'd know all about blind stupidity...wouldn't you Frodo.

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by Lestat
You'd know all about blind stupidity...wouldn't you Frodo.

Well yes, I must admit to a fair amount of stupidity in my life and one hell of a lot of blindness on many matters.

But the difference here, my friend, is that my stupidity has never been shackled to me by my religion.

 

[Lestat]

Originally posted by Frodo
Well yes, I must admit to a fair amount of stupidity in my life and one hell of a lot of blindness on many matters.

hmm...I think that might be the most accurate thing I've ever seen you post Frodo.

Originally posted by Frodo
But the difference here, my friend, is that my stupidity has never been shackled to me by my religion. [/B]

Oh...I get it...your stupidity just comes naturally hey.

 

[GuruJane]

Originally posted by Lestat
About 10 years ago...the when the mufti of Cairo returned from Europe...the press asked him about what he thought about the ethics and morals of the European.

His reply.....

"In Europe I saw many Islamic countries...with no muslims...and I have now returned to a non-Islamic country....full of muslims. "

Needless to say it didn't go down to well with the locals....I believe he was replaced later that year.

lestat ... that's one of the saddest quotes have read since i came on this board. Also one of the truest ....

 

[Cyclops]

Originally posted by Lestat
And which prophets are not accepted by Islam??

Remember....the Quran tells us that there are hundreds of prophets....and not all of them are named in the Quran. There are prophets that we do not even know of.

So could you please tell me of these 'prophets that are not accepted by Islam'...

Which prophets??

Buddha, Joseph Smith, Zoroaster are all considered as prophets by some people (not me, and not Sunni Muslims). I'm just pointing out that those statements are based on faith in Islam, which I do not have.

The Christian version of Jesus is a rather different person to Isa in the Qu'ran. Most Christians see him as the son of God which is blasphemy in Islamic eyes (as the Islamic denial of his divinity is blasphemy to most Christians).

Originally posted by Lestat
Thats actually not true...a women testimony is believed and accepted in a court of law...I'm actually curious as to where you got that idea from. Agreed though...a womans testimony is not seen as equal as that of a man...however...for you to say that 'they can't be believed in a court of law' is in fact incorrect. Perhaps today this is the case in some predominantly muslim countries...but if so..then they are going against the teachings of the Quran.

Quite right, a slip of the tongue, I meant they are considered less trustworthy than men.

Thank you for pointing that out, because stupid mistakes have a way of becoming accepted (like "Catholics can't get divorced" or "all Muslims are terrorists"). I don't know of any countries that disqualify women's testimony altogether.

Originally posted by Lestat
A woman has the right to own property....the right to vote...the right to demand a divorce...all these are rights which were denied women by the Bible.

...all of them less than a man's. Where's the right to vote in the Qu'ran? Honest question, I don't know it at all.

Mate at the time it was written (c.640 AD) those guarantees for a women's rights were far greater than most societies had, so for its time it was an outstanding humanist document. However times change and now reasonable people expect that women will be recognised as equal to men in legal, financial and political areas.

I'm not advocating the Bible as a superior alternative to the Qu'ran, which is a far more unified text with a far more coherent message. The Bible was composed over a 1000 year span, compiled and edited and changed over the last 2400 years. I thas many points of veiw, some more conservative and narrow minded than the Qu'ran, some more liberal and progressive.

Islam has shown a great deal more integrity and respect for the Qu'ran, which shows no obvious signs of being tampered with. It is also ( I think) the work of one man-Muhammed-and conveys his orderly world veiw, albeit a bit of an old-fashioned one.

Originally posted by Lestat
Yes...women do recieve less inheritance then men...but the reason for this is that men are seen as the main breadwinners. Any money that a man earns belongs to his family...whereas it is stated that any money that the woman earns is HER money..she is under no obligation to contribute this money to the running of the family/household....however she may contribute if she chooses too?

That still doesn't make it right or fair. In general women get a worse deal than blokes. They still do these days, but tis getting better.

The Qu'ran sets out a conservative mode of life suited to 7h century Arabian life. I think much of it is unsuited to 21st Century life anywhere on Earth.

I am sure that the many people who embrace Islam have the imagination and faith to adapt their religion to modern circumstances, and as it is a living and vital faith they will be able to adapt it some more.

Originally posted by Lestat
Could you please reference the surah and verse which led you to this conclusion that woman are not to be believed in a Sharia court???

I don't have one, I was mistaken and I have never studied the Qu'ran as such.

Originally posted by Lestat
Just out of curiousity...have you read the Quran? If so...which translation??

Trick question there-I know that it isn't the Qu'ran if it isn't in Arabic. I can't read Arabic, so no. I have studied English translations (I don't recall which ones) a little, usually in parallel with the Bible, some years ago now.

I have been reading a lot about Arabia recently. I found a terrific book that explored the language of the Quran, the meaning of the word "Arab" and the kind of society Muhammed was born into called "The Arabs in Antiquity", by some Swedish fella. Very dense scholarly stuff, very good.

Of course as a school kid we get taught a lot of nonsense about Islam in history. We get the Disney verision Arabian Nights, noble crusaders vs cruel saracens (except noble "Saladin"=Salah-uh-Din bin Yusuf), all pretty sterotyped, so I wanted to get a bit of an idea for myself.

Richard Francis Burton's translation of the Arabian Nights is an interesting work, he was pretty unpredjudiced for a Pom, and he loved Islam without being a believer. The footnotes to the stories he translated give an extraordinary view about Muslim life in the 19th century in Egypt and India especially.

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by Lestat
hmm...I think that might be the most accurate thing I've ever seen you post Frodo.



Oh...I get it...your stupidity just comes naturally hey.

Thanks

And I guess that means your stupidity comes unnaturally hey

 

[Lestat]

At work at the moment..so can't really reply in full...but will later I promise.


Just quickly....(warning peoples...cut and paste coming up )

Where's the right to vote in the Qu'ran? Honest question, I don't know it at all.

Sura - 60 The Test (Al-Mumtahanah)
[60:12] O you prophet, when the believing women (who abandoned the disbelievers) to seek asylum with you pledge to you that they will not set up any idols besides GOD, nor steal, nor commit adultery, nor kill their children, nor fabricate any falsehood, nor disobey your righteous orders, you shall accept their pledge, and pray to GOD to forgive them. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.

The leader of an Islamic state is confirmed by the people through a process known as bai’ah; a symbolic contract between the leader and the people wherein the leader promises to obey Islamic law and the people, in exchange, promise their allegiance. Iqbal, Justice Javid, "The Concept of State in Islam" State, Politics, and Islam (ed. Mumtaz Ahmed, American Trust Publications 1986, p. 38). In essence, bai’ah is the election of a leader, for without the bai’ah the purported leader has no legitimacy and thus cannot act as the head of state. M.F. Osman, Human Rights Between Islamic Sharia and Western Legal Thought, Dar al Shuruq, 1982, p. 110 (citing Abdelwahab Khallaf’s Political Sharia). Ibn Taymiya in his work Minhaj al Sunna stresses the requirement of bai’ah by the people for a leader to be legitimate. Ibn Taymiya discusses the occurrence where Abu Bakr nominated Umar ibn al Khattab to succeed him as caliph. Ibn Taymiya stated that Umar became the caliph only when he received the bai’ah from the people. Ibn Taymiya further stated that if Umar had not received the bai’ah, he would not have become the leader, despite his nomination by Abu Bakr M.F. Osman, Human Rights Between Islamic Sharia and Western Legal Thought, Dar al Shuruq, 1982, p. 111.

In early Islam women were included in the giving of the bai’ah. Prophet Muhammad received the bai’ah from the people. The Quran addresses the issue of women giving the bai’ah to Prophet Muhammad and God tells Muhammad to accept the pledge of the women. "O Prophet! Whenever believing women come unto thee to pledge their allegiance to thee...then accept their pledge of allegiance." (Quran 60:12). In 645 A.D. (23 A.H.) Umar, the second head of state after the death of Prophet Muhammad, convened a group to determine his successor. One of the group, Abdul Rahman, went to the people to consult with them as to who should be the next leader. Abdul Rahman consulted both women and men, thus women had a say in who would be their leader. Through this process Uthman was selected to succeed Umar. Iqbal, Justice Javid, "The Concept of State in Islam" State, Politics, and Islam (ed. Mumtaz Ahmed, American Trust Publications 1986, p. 43).


http://www.mwlusa.org/publications/essays/polirights.html

 

[Lestat]

Originally posted by Cyclops
Buddha, Joseph Smith, Zoroaster are all considered as prophets by some people (not me, and not Sunni Muslims). I'm just pointing out that those statements are based on faith in Islam, which I do not have.

In regards to the messengers all that we really know are the messengers that were named in the Koran (eg. Jesus, Moses, Abraham, etc, etc) and that the prophet Muhummed (pbuh) was the final messenger of God.

So maybe Buddha was a prophet (we cannot definately dismiss this claim...I have in fact heard some muslims from the east believe that he was....however, I haven't heard their reasons for these conclusions).

Zoroaster....was he alive before the prophet...if so, then maybe he was a prophet too. The Koran tells us who were prophets...it does not tell us who wasn't....what it does tell us is that Muhummed was the last prophet to be sent to mankind. (hence..I don't believe Joseph Smith could be a prophet..from an Islamic point of view).

Originally posted by Cyclops
The Christian version of Jesus is a rather different person to Isa in the Qu'ran. Most Christians see him as the son of God which is blasphemy in Islamic eyes (as the Islamic denial of his divinity is blasphemy to most Christians).
[/B]

Well thats probably the only difference when you think about it.

We believe in the miracles of Jesus (the Koran tells the tale of Jesus talking straight after his birth..the first of his miracles)...and most importantly we believe in the divine origin of his message.

We just don't believe that he ever claimed to be God...or the Son of God (and the other big one is that we don't believe that he died on the cross)...we actually don't believe Jesus has died at all.

However...as with Christians we do believe that he will return before the day of judgement.

Originally posted by Cyclops
Quite right, a slip of the tongue, I meant they are considered less trustworthy than men.[/B]

I wouldn't say less trustworthy.

Originally posted by Cyclops
Mate at the time it was written (c.640 AD) those guarantees for a women's rights were far greater than most societies had, so for its time it was an outstanding humanist document. However times change and now reasonable people expect that women will be recognised as equal to men in legal, financial and political areas.[/B]

But lets face it mate...in reality women are not equal to men legally, financially, politically or even socially.

Yes these legal frameworks are in place....but if you look at it....men still have the best jobs (I don't see many woman CEO's), woman still face discrimination in the workplace....go clubbing and you'll see that woman are still seen as sexual objects...and politically...we are still years away from having a woman prime minister.

If woman were seen as equal to men....then these issues I have raised should not even be issues...

The Koran clearly states a number of times that woman are to be treated equally to men....equally, but differently. Cause we are both different.

Originally posted by Cyclops
Islam has shown a great deal more integrity and respect for the Qu'ran, which shows no obvious signs of being tampered with. It is also ( I think) the work of one man-Muhammed-and conveys his orderly world veiw, albeit a bit of an old-fashioned one.

This is where we'll agree to disagree I think.

I believe that the Koran is the work of god...sent to mankind through Muhummed. And it doesn't need to be old fashioned. I see the Koran as standing the test of time....bit like pink floyd

Originally posted by Cyclops
That still doesn't make it right or fair. In general women get a worse deal than blokes. They still do these days, but tis getting better.[/B]

Definately not...doesn't make it right..and I do agree that generally women do get a worst deal then men. But that is from a lack of Islam.....

Have you read the Hadith with the Quran...you'll be amazed at some of the laws regarding woman....and the protection and favour that Allah has bestowed upon woman.

Originally posted by Cyclops
The Qu'ran sets out a conservative mode of life suited to 7h century Arabian life. I think much of it is unsuited to 21st Century life anywhere on Earth.

No doubt there are aspects to our lives today which may seem to have past the Koran by...but I don't believe that is true.

The Koran should be used today to make rulings from...much in the same way as the muslims did in the 14th century...when faced with new sciences...the muslims of the time used the 700 y.o koran as a guide and rule from Allah.

Unfortunately we muslims do not do this today...hence we have fallen way behind in the sciences and the arts.

Originally posted by Cyclops
I am sure that the many people who embrace Islam have the imagination and faith to adapt their religion to modern circumstances, and as it is a living and vital faith they will be able to adapt it some more.

I sure hope so

Originally posted by Cyclops
Trick question there-I know that it isn't the Qu'ran if it isn't in Arabic. I can't read Arabic, so no. I have studied English translations (I don't recall which ones) a little, usually in parallel with the Bible, some years ago now.

Didn't mean it to be a trick question. I mean the translations.....

Yeah..your right, its not the Koran if it isn't arabic...I can't read arabic either...I've only read the translations. But I can speak arabic which helps a little (though I can't read)..and I do know the arabic meaning of some words.

But I was asking if you'd read any translations of the Koran....and which ones...cause one of my observations is that some of the english translations vary quite a fair bit.

Originally posted by Cyclops
I have been reading a lot about Arabia recently. I found a terrific book that explored the language of the Quran, the meaning of the word "Arab" and the kind of society Muhammed was born into called "The Arabs in Antiquity", by some Swedish fella. Very dense scholarly stuff, very good.

Sounds good...I'll look it up.

Originally posted by Cyclops
Of course as a school kid we get taught a lot of nonsense about Islam in history. We get the Disney verision Arabian Nights, noble crusaders vs cruel saracens (except noble "Saladin"=Salah-uh-Din bin Yusuf), all pretty sterotyped, so I wanted to get a bit of an idea for myself.[/B]

I used to absolutely love the arabian nights when I was a kid. Remeber first time I picked it up.....couldn't put it down. (it was the G rated version )

Originally posted by Cyclops
Richard Francis Burton's translation of the Arabian Nights is an interesting work, he was pretty unpredjudiced for a Pom, and he loved Islam without being a believer. The footnotes to the stories he translated give an extraordinary view about Muslim life in the 19th century in Egypt and India especially. [/B]

Yeah...read it...great book.

 

[Cyclops]

Originally posted by Lestat
In regards to the messengers all that we really know are the messengers that were named in the Koran (eg. Jesus, Moses, Abraham, etc, etc) and that the prophet Muhummed (pbuh) was the final messenger of God.

So maybe Buddha was a prophet (we cannot definately dismiss this claim...I have in fact heard some muslims from the east believe that he was....however, I haven't heard their reasons for these conclusions).

Buddha was an ascetic, a man who undertook severe personal discipline to acheive wisdom, and decided it didn't work. He rejected fasting and poverty (he wasn't even a vegetarian as some people seem to think).

His message has been very roughly handled by his modern followers, turning it into some kind of religion with monks, nuns, scandals, hell, dodgy bulldust about the world being an illusion, donations etc.

As far as I can make out, he was a pretty sceptical bloke, who told people not to get to worked up about things. He specifically said not to worry about the afterlife because you don't know what happens. All the stuff about karma and reincarnation is from Hinduism and really has nothing to do with Buddha.

Not so much a prophet as a philosopher in my book, but don't tell the Dalai Lama, he's making a decent quid out of his version.

Originally posted by Lestat
Zoroaster....was he alive before the prophet...if so, then maybe he was a prophet too. The Koran tells us who were prophets...it does not tell us who wasn't....what it does tell us is that Muhummed was the last prophet to be sent to mankind. (hence..I don't believe Joseph Smith could be a prophet..from an Islamic point of view).

Zoroaster was a great religious reformer in Persia before the time of the prophet, of the fire worshipping kind specifically condemned by Islam. These days the religion is called Parsee-there's a few left in India (Freddy Mecury was born into a Parsee family-thats why they call him Mr Farenheit).

Originally posted by Lestat
The Koran clearly states a number of times that woman are to be treated equally to men....equally, but differently. Cause we are both different.

Equal isn't different, it can't be. No denies the basic biological differences, but the old rules which confined women and men to different spheres and different roles are pretty much irrelevant today. Women and men can do almost the same work, because machines have replaced muscle.

Originally posted by Lestat
. I see the Koran as standing the test of time....bit like pink floyd .

I'd never insult the Qu'ran to that extent. Say Led Zepplin and maybe you'll escape Gehennam.

Originally posted by Lestat
The Koran should be used today to make rulings from...much in the same way as the muslims did in the 14th century...when faced with new sciences...the muslims of the time used the 700 y.o koran as a guide and rule from Allah.

Mate that's why Islamic societies became so conservative-the Caliphs stuck to the old principles when the Turks turned up and conquered them all with gunpowder.

Then the Europeans (who didn't even know how to brush their teeth) overtook the Islamic countries in technology and economic organisation, and took over the world. They adapted to changes and prospered: eg the rejected the Chrsitian ethic of pacificism and universal love, and adopted the Islamic idea of holy war (jihad=crusade) in order to resist and survive.

In the 18th century the enligfhtenment and French revolution challenged the old order and made huge advances possible (eg the industrial revolution & women's rights).

Originally posted by Lestat
I used to absolutely love the arabian nights when I was a kid. Remeber first time I picked it up.....couldn't put it down. (it was the G rated version )

That Burton version has all the juicy bits left in-after all they were meant for an adult audience. I suppose originally they were told by wandering story tellers who entertained people after dinner-these stories turn up in different traditions from China to ireland.

The stories were collected over the centuries and published in Egypt from the 1700's onwards. The stories are OK (although some of them get a bit repetitive) and sometimes get a bit racy (like when the Sultan springs his wife and all the concubines playing up with the slaves).