Anonymous wrote:Wow, this has gotten abstruse. Arguing about the various compilers of hadith, which in the end are just sayings of the prophet and may be used to give one some direction on how to live his or her personal life but in the end not what any Muslim would say is the word of God, which is reserved for the Koran (assuming one believes in its authenticity).

So, frankly, who really cares other than scholars who can glean insights into the history and culture of early Islam--a fascinating topic but not of much relevance to the average person, Muslim or not.

Hm...I dunno, who care about sayings of the prophet? How about the people who have to live under the laws inspired by the damn thing?

My sister in law is a Christian living in a Muslim country. Her husband has MS and is dying, very very slowly. She is infertile and never had children. So when her husband dies at a young age, her in-laws will inherit most of his property thanks to Shariah law, because she never had children. A woman who has a female child also has to forfeit a portion of her husband's assets if he dies. Male siblings earn a larger share at their parents' death.

I'm not a huge fan of Islamic law.

Wow, this has gotten abstruse. Arguing about the various compilers of hadith, which in the end are just sayings of the prophet and may be used to give one some direction on how to live his or her personal life but in the end not what any Muslim would say is the word of God, which is reserved for the Koran (assuming one believes in its authenticity).

So, frankly, who really cares other than scholars who can glean insights into the history and culture of early Islam--a fascinating topic but not of much relevance to the average person, Muslim or not.

I am fervently anti-Islamic fundamentalism. I feel the same way about fundamentalists of other religions: Jewish, Christian, Hindu. Don't know of any Buddhist fundamentalists. I like religion, and these people distort and destroy it. Right now it's the Jewish and Islamic fundamentalists wreaking the most havoc on the world, so my vitriol is greatest for them, but that could change depending on if other fundamentalist see fit to stir up even greater trouble.

PS: One of the scholars you think is influenced by "olden days" and cultural practices is Mr. Yusuf's boss.

Anonymous wrote:

You don't just simply disagree with the principles of Islam. You are to be distinguished from one who simply disagrees. You studied the religion, you accumulated a vast bank of knowledge now, albeit your understanding of Islam has serious gaping holes. You then carefully craft an argument based only on olden day scholars from other countries who lived under the influence of tribal and cultural influences. You reject anyone who is an accepted and reputable scholar that has a less harsh interpretation of Islam, yet there are many! You rely on unreliable authority. You refuse to even view the youtube links I provided for your education. What can be your motive? Because its the only way to vilify Islam. Rely on modern scholars who are not influenced by Arab tribal traditions and culture and your entire argument fails.

You are transparent.

The issue isn't whether the scholars I quote are disagreeable to you. The issue is whether their rulings are based on the proper chain of evidence, i.e. Islamically valid.

I don't reject Hamza Yusuf, I just don't see how he's any better than Quaradawi just because you like him more. Does he have access to evidence that Quaradawi doesn't? Why is Quaradawi an unreliable authority? why is Bin Baz? why is bin Bayyah? Why? Because you don't happen to like them? But your affection isn't the yardstick here. Are they relying on proper evidence or not?

And yes, I've watched that link but got bored because there's so many like it. You think you're making a great discovery here or something?

I don't begrudge you the love of modern scholars, but your position that everyone who chooses to interpret Islam by the words of anyone who isn't Hamza Yusuf is Islamophobic simply doesn't work. Whatever did Islam do before Hamza Yusuf showed up? Islam emerged among Arabs, was propagated by Arabs, was practiced by Arabs. They are wrong and you are right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well christian crusaders and evangelicals are not true Christian either. They are pseudo Christians. Anyone who commits evil in the name of religion can not belong to Godly religion. And yet here you are, not Christian, not Muslim, not Jewish, yet you engage in self study of these religions if only to use one against the other, to foster enmity and rancor between people. Only entity I know who does that is the anti Christ.

Here YOU are, calling anyone who disagrees with you an evangelical Christian. Why is that? I'm simply curious why this is your go-to insult of choice.

You don't just simply disagree with the principles of Islam. You are to be distinguished from one who simply disagrees. You studied the religion, you accumulated a vast bank of knowledge now, albeit your understanding of Islam has serious gaping holes. You then carefully craft an argument based only on olden day scholars from other countries who lived under the influence of tribal and cultural influences. You reject anyone who is an accepted and reputable scholar that has a less harsh interpretation of Islam, yet there are many! You rely on unreliable authority. You refuse to even view the youtube links I provided for your education. What can be your motive? Because its the only way to vilify Islam. Rely on modern scholars who are not influenced by Arab tribal traditions and culture and your entire argument fails.

You are transparent.

No, I just was a citation to a reputable writing that says all the hadith are unreliable, and the only reliable collection is still in Arabic and hasn't been released to the world.

You still haven't answered: why? Hopefully that reputable writing to which you will refer me will unveil the secret why the Islamic world decided to sit on a treasure trove of the only reliable hadith instead of making it wildly available.

Are you the person who claimed Islam is growing by conversion faster than by immigration in this country?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hon, you need to sit down, because you misrepresent Islam. Books written hundreds of years after prophets died are not fool proof. Are you saying they are? This is why your self education of Islam as a christian crusader is incomplete. You need to go to Saudi Arabia and speak to members of the World Fiqh Council. Have you done that? I have. One member told me all hadith are not 100% reliable. The only text that contains authentic hadith is still in Arabic and has yet to be translated and distributed to the world. This is why you have to be extremely careful in quoting hadith, because the publications today may include unreliable ones too.

I think this is the best bit we've seen so far. You are saying that somewhere, out there, (in a secret vault under lock and key) there is an only authentic text of hadith that STILL hasn't been translated from Arabic and distributed to the world? And every other collection that has been released is unreliable?

Why in the world hasn't it been translated from Arabic? Has it been distributed to the Arabic-speaking world at least? What is the name of that veritable treasure? You are saying that someone out there has been sitting on a pile of the only authentic ahadith for centuries but they refuse to release it into the world...because..???

This is better than protocols of Zionist Elders. Is anyone in the Muslim world aware of that theory?

You forgot already? I answered this question 10 pages ago, in a different thread. The person you wish to speak with is another prominent Islamic scholar Dr. Ahmad Sakr, who was a member of that council. Lets chat after you speak with him to validate what I claim.

And this is why self education of Islam can be very dangerous. You need to confirm your interpretation is correct with one who has made it their life's mission to study Islam. Dr. Sakr has. And he was also on that council.

Anonymous wrote:

Well christian crusaders and evangelicals are not true Christian either. They are pseudo Christians. Anyone who commits evil in the name of religion can not belong to Godly religion. And yet here you are, not Christian, not Muslim, not Jewish, yet you engage in self study of these religions if only to use one against the other, to foster enmity and rancor between people. Only entity I know who does that is the anti Christ.

Here YOU are, calling anyone who disagrees with you an evangelical Christian. Why is that? I'm simply curious why this is your go-to insult of choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Well christian crusaders and evangelicals are not true Christian either. They are pseudo Christians. Anyone who commits evil in the name of religion can not belong to Godly religion. And yet here you are, not Christian, not Muslim, not Jewish, yet you engage in self study of these religions if only to use one against the other, to foster enmity and rancor between people. Only entity I know who does that is the anti Christ.

Oooh, just say Hitler.

It's amusing, though, how your insult of choice if "evangelicalcrusaderchristian", as if you simply must be any of these things to find Islam unattractive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally don't copy more than one paragraph because I think it's bothersome to read pages after pages taken by quoted content with only a paragraph or two of original new writing. But if you want to think there are Islamophobes all around you, hey, whatever fits your story. In fact, that steak you ate yesterday that was overdone? The chef was Islamophobic. The traffic that took you a while to get home was also all Islamophobic. You remind me of my Syrian friend who would trip on the sidewalk after drinking all night and say, that damn Zionist sidewalk!

To reiterate, you are a modern day Christian Crusader/evangelical Islamophobe because:

1) you refuse to recognize any countering evidence of modern day scholars just so you can vilify Islam
2) you hand pick the worst hadith which actually contradict the true word of God in the Quran so you can paint Islam as an awful religion
3) you seek out the harshest olden day scholars who still lived with old, tribal, cultural influences, just so you can say how terrible the religion is today.

Shameless tactics. This is not Christian like behavior at all.

Darlin', I hate to disappoint you. I'm not Christian. I don't believe in any religion at all. This is not the first time the fine Muslim ladies called me evangelical christian crusader for not falling into the dawah trap. I enjoy very much the look on their face when I inform them Jesus means as little to me as Muhammad.

Well christian crusaders and evangelicals are not true Christian either. They are pseudo Christians. Anyone who commits evil in the name of religion can not belong to Godly religion. And yet here you are, not Christian, not Muslim, not Jewish, yet you engage in self study of these religions if only to use one against the other, to foster enmity and rancor between people. Only entity I know who does that is the anti Christ.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It's so silly to be against a particular religion, just because extremism fueled by economic inequality is threatening Western obliviousness.

I always remind my kids that in the Middle Ages, Islam was an enlightened, tolerant and scientific-minded religion. Arts, mathematics and medicine flourished.

All the while, Christianity was in the throes of the Inquisition and medical and scientific research were crushed as witchcraft.

Good point. And we still have "Christians" who try to thwart scientific facts, e.g., the age of the earth, the existence of dinosaurs, oh, and yes, the Quiverful movement's outlook on the world population.

Well, the word on the street is that the late Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia Mr. Abdulaziz Bin Baz only decided to believe the earth is not flat after a personal audience with the Saudi prince who paid 20 million to fly to space and saw with his own eyes that the earth is indeed not flat.

So yea, these kinds are all over the place.

For the record, the Quiverful's outlook on the world population doesn't differ from the traditional Muslim view on the population very much.

Anonymous wrote:
It's so silly to be against a particular religion, just because extremism fueled by economic inequality is threatening Western obliviousness.

I always remind my kids that in the Middle Ages, Islam was an enlightened, tolerant and scientific-minded religion. Arts, mathematics and medicine flourished.

All the while, Christianity was in the throes of the Inquisition and medical and scientific research were crushed as witchcraft.

Good point. And we still have "Christians" who try to thwart scientific facts, e.g., the age of the earth, the existence of dinosaurs, oh, and yes, the Quiverful movement's outlook on the world population.

Anonymous wrote:

Hon, you need to sit down, because you misrepresent Islam. Books written hundreds of years after prophets died are not fool proof. Are you saying they are? This is why your self education of Islam as a christian crusader is incomplete. You need to go to Saudi Arabia and speak to members of the World Fiqh Council. Have you done that? I have. One member told me all hadith are not 100% reliable. The only text that contains authentic hadith is still in Arabic and has yet to be translated and distributed to the world. This is why you have to be extremely careful in quoting hadith, because the publications today may include unreliable ones too.

I think this is the best bit we've seen so far. You are saying that somewhere, out there, (in a secret vault under lock and key) there is an only authentic text of hadith that STILL hasn't been translated from Arabic and distributed to the world? And every other collection that has been released is unreliable?

Why in the world hasn't it been translated from Arabic? Has it been distributed to the Arabic-speaking world at least? What is the name of that veritable treasure? You are saying that someone out there has been sitting on a pile of the only authentic ahadith for centuries but they refuse to release it into the world...because..???

This is better than protocols of Zionist Elders. Is anyone in the Muslim world aware of that theory?

Anonymous wrote:
To reiterate, you are a modern day Christian Crusader/evangelical Islamophobe because:

I am not a Christian. I don't believe in any religion.

Anonymous wrote:
1) you refuse to recognize any countering evidence of modern day scholars just so you can vilify Islam

I don't refuse to recognize that it exists. I just don't give it more weight than any other evidence. To me, Yusuf and Bin Baz are equally reliable.

Anonymous wrote:
2) you hand pick the worst hadith which actually contradict the true word of God in the Quran so you can paint Islam as an awful religion
3) you seek out the harshest olden day scholars who still lived with old, tribal, cultural influences, just so you can say how terrible the religion is today.

Bin Bayyah is still alive, and so is Qaradawi, and so is Badawi.

Anonymous wrote:
Shameless tactics. This is not Christian like behavior at all.

As I mentioned, I'm not Christian and I don't wish to behave like one.