Islamic reaction to radical Muslims

[Maiwand]

Being that muhammad is dead (I don't even think he existed), how can making him dressed in a bear suit be "hate speech?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhCjv9EcLpw

why do you think that Muhammad didn't exist. There are many historical proofs of his existende! Like the letters that he had send to many rulers of the world at that time. And the many hadiths and eye witness accounts that have been recorded of hem, also there is a complete biography of him. I think that Muhammad has the largest evidence of his existence than any other historical figure. Besides we have the Quran, a revelation from God, revealed unto Muhammad (pbub).

[imb706]

why do you think that Muhammad didn't exist. There are many historical proofs of his existende! Like the letters that he had send to many rulers of the world at that time. And the many hadiths and eye witness accounts that have been recorded of hem, also there is a complete biography of him. I think that Muhammad has the largest evidence of his existence than any other historical figure. Besides we have the Quran, a revelation from God, revealed unto Muhammad (pbub).

You can read what Robert M Price says on Muhammads existence: http://www.secularhumanism.org/libra...price_20_1.htm It's pretty much what I'd say. The "evidence" for Muhammads existence is like the "evidence" for Jesus and Buddha's existence, i.e. there is none.

[Maiwand]

ahaha, come on man, I hope you don't take that text seriously. There milions of historical record about his existence. If you doubt his existence, then someone can even doubt the existence of his own grandfather, ahaha. There are so many non-muslim scholars in a variety of desciplines that believe in the existence of him. He is even been called the most influential person in the history of mankind:

http://www.amaana.org/ismailim.html

I advice you the study the biography of the prophet, by Anwar Al-Awlaki, it's at Kalamullah.com

[imb706]

Yep, a muslim website with the title " Prophet Muhammad - The Most Influential Man in History " That's a source of some unbiased truth! Now a historical blurb from a historian? Nah, don't take that seriously...

[*Mahzala*]

Yep, a muslim website with the title " Prophet Muhammad - The Most Influential Man in History " That's a source of some unbiased truth! Now a historical blurb from a historian? Nah, don't take that seriously...

Here Jameson ... not a Muslim website, nor a Muslim author. I haven't found the exact text yet that I was looking for by Ramakrishna Rao, as I have read that years ago in hard copy. For now, as long as it is, it may keep you busy. =)

http://www.themodernreligion.com/prophet/prophet-rao.html

And, boy has this thread gone off topic or what.

[imb706]

Well, okay, I'll read that page, but the other biography is written by some anti-immigrant fruitcake who's obviously not an authority on historicity or the subject. Plus, if you have an issue with Robert M Price, address his writing and not just give some unrelated work as a response. But let's get back on topic.

[ozymandias]

Not really, we have no problems with Jews and Christians. We believe they are the past and there holy book expired.

But they claim that your book was never valid.

Obviously I am not a magician. but I pray to Allah for you.

I am not asking you to be a magician, I am simply pointing out the subtle nuances and various requirements you must meet to prove your religion is the one true religion.

I fully understand that it is impossible, and I am hoping to get you to understand this as well.

According to you the world is like a meal, you are enjoying the meal yet there is no cook. How silly is that?

Not at all. It is only silly because you make a false analogy. A better analogy would be that I am enjoying a simple apple -- a product of nature, and natural processes, with no need for a cook at all. In fact to assume that the apple I plucked from a tree *had* a cook is quite silly.

Our Perfect Holy Quran speaks about other religions and say they were valid at its time.

And their books say yours is wrong -- and they state that their god is the only god. You have to show that the Koran is 'perfect', you cannot just wave your hands and call it evidence. You are using very circular logic here -- the Koran is perfect because you believe it is perfect. You believe it is perfect because the Koran says it is perfect. This very circular logic can prove just about any religion.

There is a reason why Islam is the fastest growing religion in the U.S.A, its even growing fast in Mexico.

It's the 'newest' major religion that is not for-profit. The old religions have already been around, and everyone has already been exposed to them. When this new religion comes around and first gets major exposure people start converting. It's exactly the same pattern that exists for many many things, from computer operating system adoption, to internet memes, to political ideas.

You still failed to explain to me what brings you to a conclusion that there is no God.

I have stated this before: the complete lack of evidence, or logical reasons to believe in one. You have not explained why you came to a conclusion that I do not have a dragon in my garage. Same thing.

It seems to me like you just want to make yourself happy and you are telling yourself there is No God, No thing and the nearly 5billion who have faith are silly and uneducated?

Silly? Yes. Uneducated? Only in some ways. Some religious people are very educated. Unfortunately for religion, they do not tend to stay religious. Study after study has correlated education, intelligence and religious acceptance levels, and they all come to the same conclusion.

I mean Muslims have contributed a ton to everything you can imagine.

So have Christians, Jews, and atheists -- that is not evidence of anything, let alone that *your* faith system is correct, or even the best of all options, nor does it provide evidence for your claim that not only is there a god, but their must be one (two very separate things)

Lets not compare God and Islam to cats please.

Please do not be so easily offended every time I use a simple analogy. You appear to be a somewhat intelligent person, and somewhat fluent in English. I was not comparing your god to cats. I was simply showing you how it is possible to prove something exists, and impossible to prove it does not exist. I never said your god or religion was like a cat.

You are my brother and I will help you find faith.

You are my brother and I will help you find truth.

[ozymandias]

In some awful, strange, paradoxical way, atheists tend to take religion more seriously than the practitioners

I would say that most atheists take life more seriously than theists, as this is the only life we get. Most atheists do not care what you believe, as long as you do not force that belief on others -- and they take their right to be free from your religion very seriously.

[ozymandias]

What is freedom of speech really ? What is Hate speech ? and What is the speech that propagates hate speech ?

Agreed death threats are uncalled for, but so is an uncalled war that has brought death on so many. Do you expect them to understand your views of democracy and freedom, when under the same banner of "freedom" you march into their country laying waste to centuries worth of culture, history in your wake.

You cannot understand their point of views without considering the context of it all. These are the people you are waging war on day and night, so you understand when a picture of Prophet Muhammad doesnt get the civilised protest response you expected ?

Muslims turning to violence over this matter is wrong, but that is nothing compared to the wrong that the same people who preach about free speech are doing around the globe.

Cause and effect, you caused it now deal with it

It was fully expected, and it is the effect of the actions of the victims, however the point I am trying to make is that just because it was expected does not make it right or reasonable.

[ozymandias]

^ you think that is ridiculous ? i'll tell you a good one, US invaded Iraq saying that had weapons of mass destruction guess what they found ? an old mig burried in sand lol

Bad information leading to a military action is different than deliberate terrorism.

but thats fine killing more than 100,000 innocent people is meaningless really,

Nope. It's a tragedy.

and im talking to a guy whole belives that half of the world believes in a prophet that didnt even exist

Let's be fair -- you are talking much closer to 1/5 than 1/2. Not even 1/2 of the *religious* people on this planet are Muslim.

[ozymandias]

ahaha, come on man, I hope you don't take that text seriously. There milions of historical record about his existence. If you doubt his existence, then someone can even doubt the existence of his own grandfather, ahaha. There are so many non-muslim scholars in a variety of desciplines that believe in the existence of him. He is even been called the most influential person in the history of mankind:

http://www.amaana.org/ismailim.html

I advice you the study the biography of the prophet, by Anwar Al-Awlaki, it's at Kalamullah.com

Because a web site who's homepage has this disclaimer: "This website is an expression of personal faith and has not been commissioned by any organized body and does not represent the views of any institute or board." seems like a great and reliable source of information with no biases.

[Talal]

It was fully expected, and it is the effect of the actions of the victims, however the point I am trying to make is that just because it was expected does not make it right or reasonable.

You failed to understand my point, the matter of drawing Prophet Muhammad is raised as an infringement of "freedom" of speech right ? and the argument is that it infringes the very basic principles of "freedom" that modern socities are or should be formed on ?

My point is how can you expect them to understand these principles of right and wrong when you yourself waged an unjust war against muslims based on these exact same principles.

Normally speaking yes ofcourse issuing death threats is wrong, but can you say that ? no you cannot..because the principles and the laws that govern right and wrong in your country are the very same principles you used as a banner to wage war against muslims.

Bad information leading to a military action is different than deliberate terrorism.

bad information ? it was deliberate terrorism or do you forget that Saddam Hussein had even given them the option of turning himself in before the ultimatum was over.


Nope. It's a tragedy.

Its much more than that, its a legacy of hatred and disdain that you have given to these innocent people and this entire world will keep suffering because of "blind" statue of liberty

Let's be fair -- you are talking much closer to 1/5 than 1/2. Not even 1/2 of the *religious* people on this planet are Muslim.

I said half of the world believes that he exists, i didnt say muslim world..you dont have to be muslim to know some basic historical facts

[Punjabi]

don't make a tissue paper out of our religion.
some Muslims were violent I agree but they are sensitive.

They are making fun of our beloved prophet.
we respect you. You respect ours.

[imb706]

My point is how can you expect them to understand these principles of right and wrong when you yourself waged an unjust war against muslims based on these exact same principles.

You have to be pretty insensitive to compare a bloody war to a cartoon drawing.

Normally speaking yes ofcourse issuing death threats is wrong, but can you say that ? no you cannot..because the principles and the laws that govern right and wrong in your country are the very same principles you used as a banner to wage war against muslims.

I think the point is they shouldnt expect us to follow their rules in our country. Itd be like me going to Europe and telling them to follow American laws, its insane.

[Punjabi]

^respect our faith and we respect ur rules.

our fait has our rules.