Muslim is not a terrible religion.

I see what a few bad muslims do wrong makes everybody look down on the rest of this religion when mosy of them are good people.

Originally posted by Sratpam
I see what a few bad muslims do wrong makes everybody look down on the rest of this religion when mosy of them are good people.

i agree that it is wrong to condemn many for the work of a few. i would also caution that it can work both ways -- i would not claim that 'everybody' looks down on them.

Originally posted by Sratpam
I see what a few bad muslims do wrong makes everybody look down on the rest of this religion when mosy of them are good people.

The religion is called "Islam". A "Muslim" is a practitioner of Islam.

I've looked at the Koran and find it to be a generally uninspiring work. Parts of it are commendable, for example, where Muslims are exhorted to "never convert others to Islam on the point of a sword" (paraphrase), but other parts are full of inflammatory extremist rhetoric. Basically the book reflects the fact that Mohammad was both a mystic and a soldier, hence the book is even parts spiritual philosophy and fundamentalist extremism. Unfortunately Muslim extremists -- generally called "Islamists" -- take only the extremist sections of the Koran as their inspiration. Which is not all that different from how some Christian fundamentalists will focus on parts of the Old Testament (Leviticus, especially) to support their extremist views.

What the Islamic religion does have is a very strong mystical tradition, called "Sufism", a practitioner of which is called a "Sufi". The Sufi tradition has some excellent literature, such as that coming out of the schools of Naqshbandi Dervishes, Pir Vilayat Khan, Hazrat Vilayet Khan, and the poets like Rumi and Gibran, etc. The philosopher/traveler G.I. Gurdjieff, one the 20th century's most interesting characters, was trained in Sufi mystery schools.

Another thing Islamic culture has going for it is its architecture. Islamic mosques can be truly breathtaking, the interiors full of complex abstract patterns. This is their only way of using art to express their religion because in Islam "representational" art is considered to be idolatry. This is why you never see paintings of Mohammed or the angel Gabriel who (according to their doctrine) instructed him, etc.

The Koran does explicitly declare that Jesus was not crucified and the trinity is a theological error. So theologically Islam and Christianity are totally incompatible.

Personally, I find fundamentalist Islam as vapid and uninspiring as fundamentalist Christianity or Judaism. The mystical Islamic tradition Sufism is more interesting than the mystical Christian tradition of Gnosticism or the Jewish mysticism (Hassidism), but still takes a back seat to Eastern philosophy when it comes to exploring the metaphysics of enlightenment.

In my opinion, of course...

Originally posted by Sratpam
I see what a few bad muslims do wrong makes everybody look down on the rest of this religion when mosy of them are good people.

It's probably true that most of all people, whether religious or not, could be called 'good people', so that can't be used as a way to judge any religion's value.

One must seriously study the claims of a religion for truthfulness.

And, be prepared to reject the idea that all religions can be right, or that the truth is some combination of them all. If two or more religions exist separately, it is because at some point they make opposite claims. And of course, two opposites can't both be true!

Originally posted by chinking58
It's probably true that most of all people, whether religious or not, could be called 'good people', so that can't be used as a way to judge any religion's value.

One must seriously study the claims of a religion for truthfulness.

And, be prepared to reject the idea that all religions can be right, or that the truth is some combination ...[text shortened]... ause at some point they make opposite claims. And of course, two opposites can't both be true!

Why should any religion be true? Does it make the religion more or less good if it is factually inaccurate, or if it is allegorical rather than descriptive?

Hey sorry about that mistake. I thiught it did not sound right.

Originally posted by Acolyte
Why should any religion be true? Does it make the religion more or less good if it is factually inaccurate, or if it is allegorical rather than descriptive?

Whaaaaa?

I wouldn't want to waste my little life believing in something that isn't true!

The doctrine had better be correct (Yes, there is such a thing.), the implications need be worthwhile, and the promises must be reliable.

Yes, it matters.

Originally posted by Metamorphosis
The religion is called "Islam". A "Muslim" is a practitioner of Islam.

I've looked at the Koran and find it to be a generally uninspiring work. Parts of it are commendable, for example, where Muslims are exhorted to "never convert others to Islam on the point of a sword" (paraphrase), but other parts are full of inflammatory extremist rhetor ...[text shortened]... phy when it comes to exploring the metaphysics of enlightenment.

In my opinion, of course...

In your opinion of course........Did you read all that the Koran has to say on what to do all Christians and Jews?

Originally posted by blindfaith101
In your opinion of course........Did you read all that the Koran has to say on what to do all Christians and Jews?

As I already said, the Koran expresses multiple or apparently contradictory viewpoints. For every militant statement it makes, it has pacifist statements. Much like the Bible with its "eye for an eye" and "love your enemies". These statements have to be read in context, although fairly persuasive arguments could be made that all these holy books were written by someone with multiple personality disorder...

Originally posted by Metamorphosis
As I already said, the Koran expresses multiple or apparently contradictory viewpoints. For every militant statement it makes, it has pacifist statements. Much like the Bible with its "eye for an eye" and "love your enemies". These statements have to be read in context, although fairly persuasive arguments could be made that all these holy books were written by someone with multiple personality disorder...

Yet those viewpoints of hatred affect all Jews and all Christians.

Originally posted by blindfaith101
Yet those viewpoints of hatred affect all Jews and all Christians.

Holy Bible dwarfs the Koran when it comes to viewpoints that can be interpreted as potentially "hateful". Just check out the book of Genesis for the viewpoints promulgated about women. Eve takes the fall for the Fall. Ever wondered why? Or check out Leviticus for other viewpoints that have been variously interpreted to persecute certain segments of humanity. Leviticus 20:27 alone, one simple paragraph about "putting to death" those with "familiar spirits" (witches) and "wizards", is the theological basis for the entire European Inquisition that burned tens of thousands of so-called "witches" and "wizards" at the stake.

Originally posted by Metamorphosis
Holy Bible dwarfs the Koran when it comes to viewpoints that can be interpreted as potentially "hateful". Just check out the book of Genesis for the viewpoints promulgated about women. Eve takes the fall for the Fall. Ever wondered ...[text shortened]... thousands of so-called "witches" and "wizards" at the stake.

Thank god we don't believe that anymore and can view the bible for what it is, another ancient document.
Wow, just imagine some bizzaro parallel universe where there were these religious fanatics who tried to get science booted out of schools in favour of the whacko theories in there!
Nah, too far fetched even for fiction.

Originally posted by Metamorphosis
Holy Bible dwarfs the Koran when it comes to viewpoints that can be interpreted as potentially "hateful". Just check out the book of Genesis for the viewpoints promulgated about women. Eve takes the fall for the Fall. Ever wondered ...[text shortened]... thousands of so-called "witches" and "wizards" at the stake.

Most similarities between the three monotheistic religions begin and end in the Old Testament. The New Testament brings the teachings of Jesus, and rejects the "eye for eye" ethics, for example, and, rather importantly, the notion of the wrathful God. Judaism and Islam are Old Testament in their concept of God.

And, though I agree about the architecture, I sincerely doubt any major contribution to literature from the Islamic world. If it exists, I am yet to encounter it, and doubt I will. Sure, there was a ban or reading any books that weren't the koran (book being always singular) up until very recently indeed (second half of 19th C.), if I am not mistaken, so any great islamic literary traditions I find rather spurious.

Art is one of the first victims of fundamentalism (freedom of thought being another).

Originally posted by sjeg
Sure, there was a ban or reading any books that weren't the koran (book being always singular) up until very recently indeed (second half of 19th C.), if I am not mistaken

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age

You are very much mistaken. Many ancient Greek texts survive today only because they were copied and preserved by the Muslim world long after they'd been lost in the West, and Muslim scholars wrote texts describing advances in medicine, mathematics, engineering etc, often containing discoveries and inventions which were only acquired generations later in Europe.

Your description of an illiterate society in which religion severely limited people's freedom of thought might be fair by modern standards of literacy and tolerance, but it rather more accurately describes Christian Europe during the Middle Ages. It's only really after the Enlightenment that you can start to describe Christian societies as more tolerant of new ideas than Muslim ones.

Originally posted by sjeg
Most similarities between the three monotheistic religions begin and end in the Old Testament. The New Testament brings the teachings of Jesus, and rejects the "eye for eye" ethics, for example, and, rather importantly, the notion of the wrathful God. Judaism and Islam are Old Testament in their concept of God.

And, though I agree about the architecture, ...[text shortened]... urious.

Art is one of the first victims of fundamentalism (freedom of thought being another).

What about the commentaries and translations of the Classical Philosophers?