So I've decided to read the Quran

[Johnny Drama]

Im always a partial to fapping over a dirty ankle showing slut.

[wasted]

I'm partial to bit of hummus. Cheap as chips, innit.

[Rovim]

The way you imagine body parts can change the amounts of sexy. That's why it's fun for a lot of people to watch bitches take their clothes off slowly or just take it off, or first wear clothes and then take them off as opposed to being butt naked from the get go. At least some people. (me)

Edited September 21, 2014 by Rovim

[Johnny Drama]

Ok Georgy time for you to revert to your sordid self and start rambling about giant tits.

[Bumblefeet]

I was baptized a Christian and aside from the biblical classes where they shoved the same old tales and parables from the bible down my throat (well at least it wasn't a dick given the church's track record), I never bothered reading it nor would I ever want to. Same for the Quran, both books have antiquated and contradictory philosophies that I find any enlightened person today would have no need for and is best to regard as a curiosity of a time when man still believed the earth was flat.

I don't like this mindset at all. So should we not read great philosophers if we can find "contradictions" in their work? There's contradiction in everything. Absolutely everything. In fact, two of our greatest philosophers, Hegel and Marx, although Marx was maybe more of an historian and economist, saw the entirety of human history as determined and led by contradiction. Hegel knew better than to eliminate them completely. Marx didn't, and that's where he went wrong. Enlightenment, non contradiction and such, if you knew the history of such terms and what they've led to, you might not be so quick to dichotomize human intellectual history. I'm not saying follow the "good books," but if you don't think you can learn and grow from reading them, then I'd argue you've never really been reading anything at all, just skimming for whatever makes easy sense and doesn't "contradict" itself.

Of course I did not mean that you shouldn't read up on the works of philosophers, economists, socialists and historians. By all means do so! It will only give you more knowledge to examine the validity of religious texts (and lack thereof) as well as the historical context they were written in. I'm also not against contradiction or different viewpoints, holy books do not offer room for debate; their texts are god's or the prophet's word and you are a non-believer for challenging them; many died who did. Also, for the people who practise it in varying degrees, religion has always been window shopping; take whatever parts you adhere to and dismiss the rest.

My particular mindset in the post I made was in regards to the bible and the Quran ONLY, two books which I may add that have the audacity to claim they are the word of god (which I find a dangerous concept); I'd also think in such a text that there'd be no contradictions nor falsehoods thad have been disproven over time? I personally find the argument by believers claiming they interpret the meaning and message of the bible/Quran in their own fashion to be absurd and an easy way out for not facing the scrutiny that has befallen on those documents.

[magisme]

I was baptized a Christian and aside from the biblical classes where they shoved the same old tales and parables from the bible down my throat (well at least it wasn't a dick given the church's track record), I never bothered reading it nor would I ever want to. Same for the Quran, both books have antiquated and contradictory philosophies that I find any enlightened person today would have no need for and is best to regard as a curiosity of a time when man still believed the earth was flat.

I don't like this mindset at all. So should we not read great philosophers if we can find "contradictions" in their work? There's contradiction in everything. Absolutely everything. In fact, two of our greatest philosophers, Hegel and Marx, although Marx was maybe more of an historian and economist, saw the entirety of human history as determined and led by contradiction. Hegel knew better than to eliminate them completely. Marx didn't, and that's where he went wrong. Enlightenment, non contradiction and such, if you knew the history of such terms and what they've led to, you might not be so quick to dichotomize human intellectual history. I'm not saying follow the "good books," but if you don't think you can learn and grow from reading them, then I'd argue you've never really been reading anything at all, just skimming for whatever makes easy sense and doesn't "contradict" itself.

Of course I did not mean that you shouldn't read up on the works of philosophers, economists, socialists and historians. By all means do so! It will only give you more knowledge to examine the validity of religious texts (and lack thereof) as well as the historical context they were written in. I'm also not against contradiction or different viewpoints, holy books do not offer room for debate; their texts are god's or the prophet's word and you are a non-believer for challenging them; many died who did. Also, for the people who practise it in varying degrees, religion has always been window shopping; take whatever parts you adhere to and dismiss the rest.

My particular mindset in the post I made was in regards to the bible and the Quran ONLY, two books which I may add that have the audacity to claim they are the word of god (which I find a dangerous concept); I'd also think in such a text that there'd be no contradictions nor falsehoods thad have been disproven over time? I personally find the argument by believers claiming they interpret the meaning and message of the bible/Quran in their own fashion to be absurd and an easy way out for not facing the scrutiny that has befallen on those documents.

Yeah, I agree with all that.

It's all Literature to me.

[wasted]

With philosophy all I found is you can rationalise anything. Some are a rom com, some are Action adventure, all come with a box of pop corn and a large coke.

[Georgy Zhukov]

I've read the first sura. So far nothing about killing infidels unless they are attacking you why they are in worship or on hajj. Even then, if they are there and not attacking you, do not attack them or kill them. It is said many times "Do not overstep boundaries" ones laid by God. Also interesting to see that Jews and Christians are forgiven as anyone who seeks God will find God. Islam puts them on a direct path but any path toward God will lead them to God.

Ready to dive deeper into this subject.

I have read it a long time ago (well most of it, like 20 years ago). It's hard to read, cause it are all rules basicly. If you want to know more, you also have to read the explaining books supporting it.

But the book itself is not very different from the old testament. It never says in the beginning about killing people with other religions. Also you have to respect other people with another religion, cause they can't help it, they believe in books changed by men. Just lead them to the true faith. Killing another muslim is highly forbidden and will exclude you from entering heaven. In the beginning the book is more spiritual and later more about war. This can be explained, cause in the beginning he wasn't a ruler yet.

I have also looked for women wearing niqabs or burka's and couldn't find it. It only says a women should cover up to wrist and to ankles and the hair, but how it doesn't say. And not dress seductive. So basicly wearing a jeans, sweater and a hijab should do it as well imo. Probably burka's and Niqabs were just for protection against the sand

All these books of the three big religions are clearly written for men and not for women though.

Later in the book it's more harsh and the supporting explenation books are different in tone, also more harsh. But I haven't read all. Also culture and religion are mixed too often in the vision of non muslims about the book.

With all old religions it's clearly written for that time period. The world has progressed and a lot is too dated and doesn't fit in our new world. To hold on to those rules/books is silly imo. But I don't have a religion, I just wanted to know more. I have read the Torah and bible as well.

Regarding women, the introduction states that it was a different time for women in medieval Arabia. Moderate Muslims today can adjust it to today's standards. Women today can be just as educated today as men even more so. And there are a lot of Arab expressions that were translated that needed to be explain. LIke "be like apes!" really means be of iron will.

So yeah, the book does take a lot of critical thinking. Much like The Bible really. In ways, the Quran was written with guidlines on how to protect women. Hopefully I can figure out where that went wrong.

[downzy]

Kudos to you to Georgy for setting out on this endeavour. As much as I'm a dedicated secularist, I still think it's important to read the source books of the most prominent religions of today.

Though I'm not sure if it will help much in explaining modern day Islamic fundamentalism. The Quran, like the Torah and the Bible, lose much of their relevancy and applicability to todays time without the contextual writings that have been passed down since the dawn of each religion. It's nearly impossible to explain the many sects of Judaism through reading the Torah without also considering the Telmud and the many other writings by Rabbis who put their own interpretation on the holy book.

If you're looking for a much more focused explanation on the rise of modern day islamic fundamentalism, I recommend Lawrence Wright's book "The Looming Towers." Essential to understanding the current jihadist movement is the life and works of Sayyid Qutb. Lawrence goes into a lot of detail (though there are likely more thorough books on the man) on how his writings and speeches greatly affected people like Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. Great book if you're interested in this kind of thing.

[Axl_morris]

You will be Allah Snackbar-ing in no time.

[Facekicker]

I might read it sometime so that I can better understand Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses.

[ZoSoRose]

Has this become a massive cupcake thread? I don't feel like reading 3 pages

[Georgy Zhukov]

Has this become a massive cupcake thread? I don't feel like reading 3 pages

cupcake thread? This is a serious discussion.

[Lithium]

I want to read a book on fairytales too. I hear the Brothers Grimm made a good one.

[MB.]

I want to read a book on fairytales too. I hear the Brothers Grimm made a good one.

Yeah, did that one too. It's a lot more fun as well.

Edited September 22, 2014 by MB.

[Georgy Zhukov]

I want to read a book on fairytales too. I hear the Brothers Grimm made a good one.

Yeah, did that one too. It's a lot more fun as well.

CanterburyTales are good too.

Next sura is going to be on women. Ooooooh.

[Len Cnut]

Number 4 is it not? Surah Al-Nisa.

[Johnny Drama]

Number 4 is it not? Surah Al-Nisa.

Sounds like terrorist talk to me.

[Len Cnut]

Did you hear Mooslem terrorist chicks are getting breast impants with explosives in them? I think i wanna get a job at Customs

[Georgy Zhukov]

Number 4 is it not? Surah Al-Nisa.

Finished that one. Onto Al-Ma'ida

[Georgy Zhukov]

Looking into Hadith. I think I found a book with a good collection of them. I wonder if the FBI is watching me now?

[Len Cnut]

The Qu'rans odd in that it's not a linear story or a tale, it's God speaking directly to Muhammad and oftentimes he's telling Muhammad stuff about whats going on in his life at that time, so without knowing the backstory or context it might not make a lotta sense, kinda testament to the purity of the revelation or rather how they've kinda kept it...unadulterated, it'd be an easier read if you could add bits and tie it together.

In it's original arabic it reads like verse, like poetry, which, in the muslim world, supposedly, is a sign of it's divinity, the fact that it's faultless in a poetic sense, ties together, flows.

You will get to the bit about killing jews etc but what escapes a lot of people about that bit is that he isn't talking about all jews, he's talking about specific people. To give you the backstory, as briefly as i can (here goes, Len does brief!) Muhammad leaves Mecca, does to Medina, starts Islam, becomes essentially the leader of Medina, a statesman if you like. Now in doing this he kinda set up certain rules in Medina, almost like making a sovereign state out of it, certain rules like if you live in Medina then you are a citizen of Medina whether you're a muslim/jew/christian whatever and, y'know, you fight for it, you work for it etc etc all that shit, just as if you were the citizen of a country.

Now at a time of war, when they were being attacked there was A jewish element that, so the story goes, was givin' em up to the enemy and those verse were in specific reference to that, to seek them out wherever you find them and kill them.

Now that sounds pretty brutal a directive when you consider it's supposed to be holy scripture or whatever but there's certain distinctions to be made i.e. Muhammad was the first from among the prophets who was a statesman, who had to make the desicions of a statesman i.e. what to do in certain situations of war and also, brutal though it maybe, when you're kinda putting a nation together...and you got 5,000 people in it altogether, 20 or 30 traitors could probably go a good way to stitching that 5,000 up so it was sort of like a war thing.

So yeah, this idea that Islam is designed to or orders you to go out and kill jews is a load of shite really, as evidenced by the fact that there were jews part of the prophet Muhammads army, by being citizens of Medina, they fought alongside the muslims, this escapes a lot of the haters of Islam and indeed the dozy bastards that go around tying bombs to themselves and blowing shit up and being on a mission to rid the world of infidels, beginning with jews. Totally totally totally missed the fuckin' point.

Y'know what the sad thing about the Qu'ran is? People like yourself and MBRose who read it, independently of being attached to it by way of faith, are the people who actually grasp it the best. A lot of muslims, especially from my part of the world, are just indoctrinated from birth to believe in it's absolute divinity and do not question it or scrutinise it, some of em don't even read it in a language they understand...which is sad cuz you kinda miss out on the substance of what makes it noteworthy.

MBRoses description of her understanding of it far eclipses most muslim lads i know my age and their understanding of it and it's real meaning...and some of these guys would be ready to fight you over a percieved insult to it. All balls and no brains

Edited September 23, 2014 by Lennie Godber

[Georgy Zhukov]

I would love to learn Arabic just to see the true beauty of it like how I would love to learn Russian and experience the wonders of Tolstoy's prose.

I was watching this documentary on Islam in America, this good will group of selected religious leaders were sent to Morocco, where they dine with Muslims and talk theology and one man, an Evangelical Christian, think he was a pastor asked an Iman how can he find peace, the Iman says "Read the Gospel, you will find your answers there" and the Christian could not believe what he just heard.

You get a lot of interpretations from Muslim religious leaders. But one verse that stuck out was 4:115 which I interpret as that if you follow Islam the wrong way (such as Al Qaida) then you will burn for it.

It was explained in the footnote is that Muslims should not associate themselves with Christians and Jews who sided with polytheists. The actual people they were at war with at the time. Sure we can see it as a new religious group that wants to take over, but it is a survival of the fittest struggle. And Islam spread so fast. That is another thing I want to read about, is why it was so appealing. So far it seems to offer better lives for those in Arabia. Supposedly Egypt and Syria were these Christian strongholds, so were most of the converts Christian? I am sure they were the ones who felt weary over the debate over the divinity and nature of Jesus they've decided that Islam made more sense. Even I get confused on the natures of Jesus. In Islam, Jesus is a prophet, like Muhammad. God is the ultimate power. There are no equals. And the equality of Muslims seems to been real appealing but it doesn't seem that way today.

[bran]

Looking into Hadith. I think I found a book with a good collection of them. I wonder if the FBI is watching me now?

probably, we all know once you finish the quran on a thursday you will be a suicide bomber on friday.

[Georgy Zhukov]

Looking into Hadith. I think I found a book with a good collection of them. I wonder if the FBI is watching me now?

probably, we all know once you finish the quran on a thursday you will be a suicide bomber on friday.

I will probably throw out all my wife's nail polish too.