Cei wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
BlueAbyss wrote:
I agree that most of the teachings attributed to Jesus are peaceful. I think it is not Jesus but distortions of his teachings that are the biggest problem. This is likely true of Mohammed as well, though I'm not as familiar with Islam. I've read the Bible, but not (yet) the Koran, so I can't compare. But I have spoken to Muslims about Islam and to me what they described was essentially a religion of peace.
I assume they left out these parts:
- Female genital mutilation
- Death penalty for apostasy (only
away from Islam, of course)
- Death penalty for homosexuality
- Death penalty for insulting Muhammad
- Death penalty for being a Jew (correction: The
duty to kill
all Jews... shouldn't be misrepresenting Islam, now should I?)
- Beheading male members of a surrendering enemy tribe and distributing the women and children to your followers as slaves
- Slavery (surprised?)
- The right to rape* slaves (Otherwise, what's the point of having slaves?)
*Silly me. The concept of rape doesn't even exist in
Sharia.
And all of the above points are supported by either verses of the Quran or "authentic" Sunni
hadith.
Oh, but that *tiny* omission was surely just an oversight... right?
, and I'm at a loss for what you're even misinterpreting.
The following applies only to Sunni Islam, as I haven't finished my reading of Shia Islam - (My initial assessment is that the Sunni and Shia views do not differ much, however).
"Remove from yourself the hair of disbelief and get yourself circumcised." - Abu Dawood (1/253, no. 356) and Al-Baihaqi (1/172)
Since the hadith is only considered
hasan (good) by Islamic hadith critics and not
sahih (authentic), it cannot stand alone with certainty. However, it doesn't have to.
"Abraham performed circumcision on himself with a Qaddoom (an axe-like tool)
when he was over eighty years old" - Bukhari (no. 3356), Muslim (no. 2370) and Ahmad (2/322, 418 and 435)
"The Messenger of Allah performed the "Aqeeqah of Al-Hasan and Al-Husain, and had their circumcisions performed after seven days" (At-Tabarani in "Al-Mu'jam As-Sagheer" - p. 185)
This establishes circumcision as
Sunnah of both Abraham and Muhammad (and thus an exemplary practice for Muslims).
It is then no surprise, that circumcision (male and female) is considered
halal (permitted) by the Hanafi and Maliki schools, and
fard/wajib (obligatory) by the Shafi'i and Hanbali schools... and by the Salafi, of course.
As for context, I also invoke this Qur'anic verse (Sura 3:104)
"Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong: They are the ones to attain felicity."Now, given that female circumcision is at the very least
halal, this verse effectively prevents it from being forbidden based on the Qur'an and Sunnah.
It is also unsurprising that the prevalence of female circumcision in Africa corresponds quite well with the dominance of Islam (the Shafi'i school in particular).
Cei wrote:
Re: slavery: You think enforcing a flawless society all of a sudden in the seventh century would have worked? Slavery was hardly encouraged, it just wasn't outright prohibited.
Irrelevant. This is 2013...
...
...
Except in Saudi Arabia.
http://www.wnd.com/2003/11/21700/Cei wrote:
I'm not particularly motivated to risk spreading false information just to inform you that you're taking things out of context and what the correct context is, when you're almost certainly not going to listen to me anyway, so that's as much of an argument as you get to draw me into.
Well, I *did* show enough attention to your post to respond to it, didn't it?
Oh, and I of course have Qur'an/Hadith sources to all my other points, as well, but why spend time digging them out when you don't want to debate the topic?
Oh.. BTW. Almost forgot.... Female Circumcision = Female Genital Mutilation.
Last edited by GGPViper on 11 Jan 2013, 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
11 Jan 2013, 12:16 pm
.
.
