Turkey |
|
|
|
Ramadan in Turkey
|
260. |
29 Aug 2009 Sat 06:05 pm |
No handsom I think that is you that has got it wrong again. These interpretations were done by Islamic scholars. I will do another google and get a Scottish translation and get back too you.
Well
I am telling you you are wrong. Those islamic scholars would spend their times trying paing a rosy picture about Islam.
But the reality, the way it is interpreted and applied are different..
I have already told you that women in my country call themselves "dirty" during their mensturation !!!
|
|
261. |
29 Aug 2009 Sat 06:08 pm |
I am telling you you are wrong. Those islamic scholars would spend their times trying paing a rosy picture about Islam.
Based on what evidence? I have read some very interesting thoughts by Islamic scholars recently who are trying to effect change, including incorporating Darwin´s theory and modern living into their religion.
|
|
262. |
29 Aug 2009 Sat 06:11 pm |
Well
I am telling you you are wrong. Those islamic scholars would spend their times trying paing a rosy picture about Islam.
But the reality, the way it is interpreted and applied are different..
I have already told you that women in my country call themselves "dirty" during their mensturation !!!
Okay handsom I bow to your greater wisdom.
Edited (8/29/2009) by bydand
|
|
263. |
29 Aug 2009 Sat 06:26 pm |
Based on what evidence? I have read some very interesting thoughts by Islamic scholars recently who are trying to effect change, including incorporating Darwin´s theory and modern living into their religion.
Read Ibn Maskawayh, who lived 800 years before Darwin. See where Darwin got his theory from.
|
|
264. |
29 Aug 2009 Sat 06:30 pm |
Read Ibn Maskawayh, who lived 800 years before Darwin. See where Darwin got his theory from.
Ahh dear Alpha - I dont want to get involved in an argument about Darwinism or who was first or who plagarised who, I just wrote that the article mentioned that Islamic scholars were hoping to include Darwinism within the Quran - it is not an opinion
|
|
265. |
29 Aug 2009 Sat 06:37 pm |
Okay handsom I bow to your greater wisdom.
Do not mention it..
You were trying to defend a primitive, backward idea or ideas which are not compatible in todays way of living. So no surpise really..
|
|
266. |
29 Aug 2009 Sat 06:42 pm |
Do not mention it..
You were trying to defend a primitive, backward idea or ideas which are not compatible in todays way of living. So no surpise really..
Maybe you should have said "not compatible in today´s western way of living". Rich talk from someone who is primitive and backward in so many other ways...
|
|
267. |
29 Aug 2009 Sat 06:47 pm |
Maybe you should have said "not compatible in today´s western way of living". Rich talk from someone who is primitive and backward in so many other ways...
Lets do not get up close and personal please..OK?
|
|
268. |
30 Aug 2009 Sun 12:17 am |
Ahh dear Alpha - I dont want to get involved in an argument about Darwinism or who was first or who plagarised who, I just wrote that the article mentioned that Islamic scholars were hoping to include Darwinism within the Quran - it is not an opinion
Islam´s holy book is not one that scholars can add to or delete from.
On the other hand, if you see an Islamic scholar who is trying to reconcile Darwin´s theories with Islam, you can safely tell him he is about 900 years too late. Ibn Maskawayh was there 900 years ago.
|
|
269. |
30 Aug 2009 Sun 12:30 am |
Islam´s holy book is not one that scholars can add to or delete from.
On the other hand, if you see an Islamic scholar who is trying to reconcile Darwin´s theories with Islam, you can safely tell him he is about 900 years too late. Ibn Maskawayh was there 900 years ago.
Let me repeat - I was writing something I had READ in an article, it was not my personal opinion. However, as you are seeking my personal opinion then firstly I would say that Ibn Maskawayh may have been first, but he certainly was not very successful in convincing anybody! Secondly, it is not about adding anything or deleting it from the Quran, it is about understanding it. This is very important, as for centuries you have all been thinking you were going to spend paradise with 70 virgins when in fact you will receive grapes!
I believe this shows the importance of translating CORRECTLY from original texts for better understanding - dont you?
Edited (8/30/2009) by _AE_
|
|
270. |
30 Aug 2009 Sun 12:39 am |
However...not wanting to dampen your spirit, "modern apologists of Islam try to downplay the evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says, even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash´ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into paradise". The sensual pleasures are graphically elaborated by Al-Suyuti (died 1505 ), Koranic commentator and polymath. He wrote: "Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetising vaginas."
A kind of spiritual Viagra?
Edited (8/30/2009) by _AE_
|
|
|