Muslims please help out
-
I tried combing the Quran with a search but cannot find any verses inside about any injunction of images of Muhamad.
I know this is what Muslims always claim and believe but where are the verses?
Can Atobe and Blur please help out. -
Very cute in your "no brainer" attempt to act blur .
Your continued efforts to deride Islam and the Muslims is surely quite clear by now. .
Can we believe in your economising ability in thinking when nothing exist in your character as a "no brainer" ? .
Those TWENTY MUSLIMS - whom you claimed as FRIENDS, and whom you claimed that you had spoken to and based your view on your discussion with them - have probably existed in the huge cavern of a "no brainer". .
You certainly have outdone your "no brainer" capability with each post that you make - simply with the aim of denigrating Islam and the Muslims.
Is there anything left to be said when you are blind to the fact that HUMAN interpretations can simply make twisted interpretations of the Quran or the teachings of the Prophet ? .
From the TENS OF THOUSAND participating in the daily violent protests against the offensive cartoons, this TENS OF THOUSANDS is but a fraction of a population of BILLIONS of MUSLIMS on this Globe. .
Only a "no brainer" will use this as a reference point to brush in a broad stroke effort that will tarnish all Muslims with a "no brainer" skill. . -
Ahemz.....heard my name being "salmon-ed"Originally posted by Atobe:Very cute in your "no brainer" attempt to act blur .
Your continued efforts to deride Islam and the Muslims is surely quite clear by now. .
Can we believe in your economising ability in thinking when nothing exist in your character as a "no brainer" ? .
Those TWENTY MUSLIMS - whom you claimed as FRIENDS, and whom you claimed that you had spoken to and based your view on your discussion with them - have probably existed in the huge cavern of a "no brainer". .
You certainly have outdone your "no brainer" capability with each post that you make - simply with the aim of denigrating Islam and the Muslims.
Is there anything left to be said when you are blind to the fact that HUMAN interpretations can simply make twisted interpretations of the Quran or the teachings of the Prophet ? .
From the TENS OF THOUSAND participating in the daily violent protests against the offensive cartoons, this TENS OF THOUSANDS is but a fraction of a population of BILLIONS of MUSLIMS on this Globe. .
Only a "no brainer" will use this as a reference point to brush in a broad stroke effort that will tarnish all Muslims with a "no brainer" skill. .
Don't mind me bro Atobe.....I echo your sentiments, thoughts & opinions on this troll who is progressively making himself more & more of a d.i.c.k.head around here. You have done well, amazingly speaking, in entertaining this clown for far too long
Its better off you saving your tireless efforts in constructive debate and discussions with other honest & genuine-asking forumers instead, just a thought -
No offense but I saw that Salman was trying to reverse the "smoke process" with his continuous efforts to become a crude and raw Salman.Originally posted by blurberry:Ahemz.....heard my name being "salmon-ed"
Don't mind me bro Atobe.....I echo your sentiments, thoughts & opinions on this troll who is progressively making himself more & more of a d.i.c.k.head around here. You have done well, amazingly speaking, in entertaining this clown for far too long
Its better off you saving your tireless efforts in constructive debate and discussions with other honest & genuine-asking forumers instead, just a thought
Engaging the "no brainer" provides a relief from the daily grind, like playing with a clown fish, and engaging a "no-brainer" will certainly help to exercise the fingers on the keyboard, and allow the mind to run the full marathon.
Thanks for your thoughts. -
Err.. excuse me guys, none of you can show me any verses from the Quran that says Muhamad should not be depicted in pictures? Is it really in the Quran?
Looks like even me simple no brainer floored both of you already.
I have read the entire Quran before but cannot remember such a teaching. Did a word search for 'picture' 'image' 'prophet' 'draw' and found nothing that relates to it.
I certainly can't find it. So please help out. -
God spoke a few words, and mankind went and multiplied HIS words into so many versions of the Book.
-
You are being a racist in a subtle way.Originally posted by Salman:I tried combing the Quran with a search but cannot find any verses inside about any injunction of images of Muhamad.
I know this is what Muslims always claim and believe but where are the verses?
Can Atobe and Blur please help out. -
How am I a racist, please explain.
-
Hi Sal,Originally posted by Salman:Err.. excuse me guys, none of you can show me any verses from the Quran that says Muhamad should not be depicted in pictures? Is it really in the Quran?
Looks like even me simple no brainer floored both of you already.
I have read the entire Quran before but cannot remember such a teaching. Did a word search for 'picture' 'image' 'prophet' 'draw' and found nothing that relates to it.
I certainly can't find it. So please help out.
I find I agree with you, as even in Christian faith, people tended to interprete the Word of God in their own way. More or less, putting words in God's mouth. -
cloaked behind a semblance of innocent doubt.Originally posted by Salman:How am I a racist, please explain.
you think we don't know?
Mai keh keh la. Kong ah ni zuay jiao uay... -
Although it is an innocent request to know more, but your replies shows that you are not.Originally posted by Salman:How am I a racist, please explain.
Here's your reply:Err.. excuse me guys, none of you can show me any verses from the Quran that says Muhamad should not be depicted in pictures? Is it really in the Quran?
I won't say too much, you know yourself best.
Looks like even me simple no brainer floored both of you already.
I have read the entire Quran before but cannot remember such a teaching. Did a word search for 'picture' 'image' 'prophet' 'draw' and found nothing that relates to it.
I certainly can't find it. So please help out.
-
Not keh keh. what is there to keh keh.Originally posted by LazerLordz:cloaked behind a semblance of innocent doubt.
you think we don't know?
Mai keh keh la. Kong ah ni zuay jiao uay...
Muslims claim that there is such a teaching. A funny thought came to my head as I cannot remember it at all.
I do not want to assume anything, thats why I am checking it out myself. since I can't find it, I am asking these islam apologists.
If it is there, then my doubts are cleared and I can sit down, read and study teh verse and examine its interpretation and see whether Muslims are taking it correctly. I just cannot understand a divine teaching that tells people to riot ovre cartoons.
If it isn't there, then there's a scandal of mass deception. A deception of both Muslims and non Muslims by fanatics.
One way or another, how can it be racist? Please explain. -
You see, you throw an accusation but can't back it up whatsover.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:I won't say too much, you know yourself best.
What good are your words?
If you can prove that I am a racist, I will apologise and get out of this forum forever. -
I say subtle. If it is easy to prove subtle evidence, I would have proven it.Originally posted by Salman:You see, you throw an accusation but can't back it up whatsover.
What good are your words?
If you can prove that I am a racist, I will apologise and get out of this forum forever.
Why would you want to know whether is there such a verse that their Prophet can't be drawn into a cartoon? How do you want to make use of this information?
When you answered the above two questions, you would have known whether you are racist or not. And since it is subtle, don't ask me for proof. It would require lots of assumptions (true or untrue) to be made, which may or may not be fair to you. -
Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:
Subtle means there is substance right? If there is substance then you must be able to show it since you alledgely detect it and all writinsg are posted in the open.
I say subtle. If it is easy to prove subtle evidence, I would have proven it.
The fact that you can't show proof means you have commited slander.
I think it would be more honourable for you to apologise rather than post further attacks or accusations.
Because we need the truth, especially when lies could possibly be used to silence critics and start riots. We need to confront lies.
Why would you want to know whether is there such a verse that their Prophet can't be drawn into a cartoon? How do you want to make use of this information?
See, you cannot prove I am a racists. You are a slanderer babay!
When you answered the above two questions, you would have known whether you are racist or not. And since it is subtle, don't ask me for proof. It would require lots of assumptions (true or untrue) to be made, which may or may not be fair to you.
Again the challenge holds, if you can prove I am a racists, I will get lost from this forum forever. Its up to you. The ball is in your court. -
My subtle definition and yours different. Mine requires me to make assumptions behind your post. I assume that from your post, you are going to make use of this information to do something else, which is not good to the Muslims, and hence I say you are a racist in a subtle way.Originally posted by Salman:Subtle means there is substance right? If there is substance then you must be able to show it since you alledgely detect it and all writinsg are posted in the open.
The fact that you can't show proof means you have commited slander.
I think it would be more honourable for you to apologise rather than post further attacks or accusations.
For yours, you say physical proof, through your posting.Because we need the truth, especially when lies could possibly be used to silence critics and start riots. We need to confront lies.
I don't get you. Silence who? Who is lying? -
My subtle definition and yours different. Mine requires me to make assumptions behind your post. I assume that from your post, you are going to make use of this information to do something else, which is not good to the Muslims, and hence I say you are a racist in a subtle way.
Oh I see, so you made an assumption.
I am actually doing my muslim frens a favour. It helps clarify their fiath for them and stops fanatism. What is so racist abt that?
Up till now I still do not know if this tecahing of their is in the Quran but me hunch says its not there cos I don't remember reading it even once.
Don't you understand? These fanatics are saying that the cartoons are against islamic teachings and they are using it to intimidate westerners. Its a opportunitic excuse for fanatics who used this flimsy issue to to silence critics to muslims and islam. If they succeed over this flimsy thing, then they will cut off future criticisms for other things.
I don't get you. Silence who? Who is lying?
But if we can prove that what they claim is not in the Quran, their actiosn becomes illegitimate. -
I apologize for the wrong allegations made to you.Originally posted by Salman:Oh I see, so you made an assumption.
I am actually doing my muslim frens a favour. It helps clarify their fiath for them and stops fanatism. What is so racist abt that?
Up till now I still do not know if this tecahing of their is in the Quran but me hunch says its not there cos I don't remember reading it even once.Don't you understand? These fanatics are saying that the cartoons are against islamic teachings and they are using it to intimidate westerners. Its a opportunitic excuse for fanatics who used this flimsy issue to to silence critics to muslims and islam. If they succeed over this flimsy thing, then they will cut off future criticisms for other things.
They probably don't mean that there is a verse in the Quran that says we can't draw a cartoon of him. It's probably against their teachings to make fun of God.
But if we can prove that what they claim is not in the Quran, their actiosn becomes illegitimate. -
Muhamad is not God.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:They probably don't mean that there is a verse in the Quran that says we can't draw a cartoon of him. It's probably against their teachings to make fun of God.
Even if Muhamad is God, whats the problem with drawing? They can certainly protest. But what's the excuse to issue violent threats and riot even if Allah was depicted disrespectfully?
We need to confront fanatics and their evil lies. We cannot afford to keep quiet or we will all pay for it one day. -
The stupidity of a small minded person is dangerous, and a small minded person being also a "no brainer" make his conscientious stupidity a crime beyond comparison.
Did you seriously believe the search engine in google and altavista cannot fulfill any subject on earth ?
It depends very much on the choice of 'key words' that is entered for the search engines to find the required information.
Surely we can only see garbage coming from a "no brainer" and what else can we expect him to feed the search engines with in his search for more filth and garbage to heap onto a religion that he has no respect nor understanding.
Can we believe that a person who is a "no brainer" can appreciate the Arabic Language to read through the entire Quran ?
Can we believe that a "no brainer" is able to 'STUDY' the tenets of the Quran ?
CULTURE CLASH
Bonfire of the Pieties
Islam prohibits neither images of Muhammad nor jokes about religion.
BY AMIR TAHERI
Wednesday, February 8, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST
"The Muslim Fury," one newspaper headline screamed. "The Rage of Islam Sweeps Europe," said another. "The clash of civilizations is coming," warned one commentator. All this refers to the row provoked by the publication of cartoons of the prophet Muhammad in a Danish newspaper four months ago. Since then a number of demonstrations have been held, mostly--though not exclusively--in the West, and Scandinavian embassies and consulates have been besieged.
But how representative of Islam are all those demonstrators? The "rage machine" was set in motion when the Muslim Brotherhood--a political, not a religious, organization--called on sympathizers in the Middle East and Europe to take the field. A fatwa was issued by Yussuf al-Qaradawi, a Brotherhood sheikh with his own program on al-Jazeera. Not to be left behind, the Brotherhood's rivals, Hizb al-Tahrir al-Islami (Islamic Liberation Party) and the Movement of the Exiles (Ghuraba), joined the fray. Believing that there might be something in it for themselves, the Syrian Baathist leaders abandoned their party's 60-year-old secular pretensions and organized attacks on the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus and Beirut.
The Muslim Brotherhood's position, put by one of its younger militants, Tariq Ramadan--who is, strangely enough, also an adviser to the British home secretary--can be summed up as follows: It is against Islamic principles to represent by imagery not only Muhammad but all the prophets of Islam; and the Muslim world is not used to laughing at religion. Both claims, however, are false.
There is no Quranic injunction against images, whether of Muhammad or anyone else. When it spread into the Levant, Islam came into contact with a version of Christianity that was militantly iconoclastic. As a result some Muslim theologians, at a time when Islam still had an organic theology, issued "fatwas" against any depiction of the Godhead. That position was further buttressed by the fact that Islam acknowledges the Jewish Ten Commandments--which include a ban on depicting God--as part of its heritage. The issue has never been decided one way or another, and the claim that a ban on images is "an absolute principle of Islam" is purely political. Islam has only one absolute principle: the Oneness of God.
Trying to invent other absolutes is, from the point of view of Islamic theology, nothing but sherk, i.e., the bestowal on the Many of the attributes of the One.
The claim that the ban on depicting Muhammad and other prophets is an absolute principle of Islam is also refuted by history. Many portraits of Muhammad have been drawn by Muslim artists, often commissioned by Muslim rulers. There is no space here to provide an exhaustive list, but these are some of the most famous:
A miniature by Sultan Muhammad-Nur Bokharai, showing Muhammad riding Buraq, a horse with the face of a beautiful woman, on his way to Jerusalem for his M'eraj or nocturnal journey to Heavens (16th century); a painting showing Archangel Gabriel guiding Muhammad into Medina, the prophet's capital after he fled from Mecca (16th century); a portrait of Muhammad, his face covered with a mask, on a pulpit in Medina (16th century); an Isfahan miniature depicting the prophet with his favorite kitten, Hurairah (17th century); Kamaleddin Behzad's miniature showing Muhammad contemplating a rose produced by a drop of sweat that fell from his face (19th century); a painting, "Massacre of the Family of the Prophet," showing Muhammad watching as his grandson Hussain is put to death by the Umayyads in Karbala (19th century); a painting showing Muhammad and seven of his first followers (18th century); and Kamal ul-Mulk's portrait of Muhammad showing the prophet holding the Quran in one hand while with the index finger of the other hand he points to the Oneness of God (19th century).
Some of these can be seen in museums within the Muslim world, including the Topkapi in Istanbul, and in Bokhara and Samarkand, Uzbekistan, and Haroun-Walat, Iran (a suburb of Isfahan). Visitors to other museums, including some in Europe, would find miniatures and book illuminations depicting Muhammad, at times wearing his Meccan burqa (cover) or his Medinan niqab (mask). There have been few statues of Muhammad, although several Iranian and Arab contemporary sculptors have produced busts of the prophet. One statue of Muhammad can be seen at the building of the U.S. Supreme Court, where the prophet is honored as one of the great "lawgivers" of mankind.
There has been other imagery: the Janissaries--the elite of the Ottoman army--carried a medallion stamped with the prophet's head (sabz qaba). Their Persian Qizilbash rivals had their own icon, depicting the head of Ali, the prophet's son-in-law and the first Imam of Shiism. As for images of other prophets, they run into millions. Perhaps the most popular is Joseph, who is presented by the Quran as the most beautiful human being created by God.
continue below -
continuation from above
Now to the second claim, that the Muslim world is not used to laughing at religion. That is true if we restrict the Muslim world to the Brotherhood and its siblings in the Salafist movement, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al Qaeda. But these are all political organizations masquerading as religious ones. They are not the sole representatives of Islam, just as the Nazi Party was not the sole representative of German culture.Their attempt at portraying Islam as a sullen culture that lacks a sense of humor is part of the same discourse that claims "suicide martyrdom" as the highest goal for all true believers.
The truth is that Islam has always had a sense of humor and has never called for chopping heads as the answer to satirists.
Muhammad himself pardoned a famous Meccan poet who had lampooned him for more than a decade. Both Arabic and Persian literature, the two great literatures of Islam, are full of examples of "laughing at religion," at times to the point of irreverence. Again, offering an exhaustive list is not possible. But those familiar with Islam's literature know of Ubaid Zakani's "Mush va Gorbeh" (Mouse and Cat), a match for Rabelais when it comes to mocking religion. Sa'adi's eloquent soliloquy on behalf of Satan mocks the "dry pious ones." And Attar portrays a hypocritical sheikh who, having fallen into the Tigris, is choked by his enormous beard. Islamic satire reaches its heights in Rumi, where a shepherd conspires with God to pull a stunt on Moses; all three end up having a good laugh.
Islamic ethics is based on "limits and proportions," which means that the answer to an offensive cartoon is a cartoon, not the burning of embassies or the kidnapping of people designated as the enemy. Islam rejects guilt by association. Just as Muslims should not blame all Westerners for the poor taste of a cartoonist who wanted to be offensive, those horrified by the spectacle of rent-a-mob sackings of embassies in the name of Islam should not blame all Muslims for what is an outburst of fascist energy.
Mr. Taheri is the author of "L'Irak: Le Dessous Des Cartes" (Editions Complexe, 2002).
Now it is hoped that all can see the bigotted efforts by Salman to condemn a religion with a following of BILLIONS, based on the acts of the TENS OF THOUSAND of misled humans.
Perhaps Salman should come clean and declare if all Singaporean Muslims are treachorous by his "no brainer" line of thoughts that we have seen up to now - since there were found 17 members from their community being held under the ISA charged for being members of J.I. to execute the instructions of the Al Qaeda. -
Man ..settle ur qualms with knives n guns k.. shiet.. like i said.. kill each other out. Who wins..who is right.
-
Opinions founded on prejudice are always sustained with the greatest of violence.Originally posted by BadzMaro:Man ..settle ur qualms with knives n guns k.. shiet.. like i said.. kill each other out. Who wins..who is right.
Francis Jeffrey (1773 - 1850)
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992), Salvor Hardin in "Foundation" -
Watch it before the fire burn your fat butt
-
Notice that despite all the cut and paste, no Muslim can show any verses fropm the Quran about the injunction of pictures of Muhamad.
So how can they justify their hatred and actions based on Islamic teachings?
How can they say Islam forbid pictures of Muhamad?