4 ms·

I'm very aware of those passages and others that reflect the religion's violent origins, having actually read the book, or most of it (have you?). If you were

by jnbiche 11y ago

I'm very aware of those passages and others that reflect the religion's violent origins, having actually read the book, or most of it (have you?). If you were disagreeing with me, did you miss the part of my comment where I said I shared the parent's opinion of Muhammed (and yours as well, I presume)? I simply was encouraging someone wondering about the Quran to read it himself so he could make up his own mind, regardless of our opinions. Obviously, in the interest of fairness, similar passages about stoning/slaying can be found in the Tanakh/Old Testament. Luckily, few Christians or Jews take those passages literally today.

acqq 11y ago
Yes, reading the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Quran and comparing them is really instructive. However Quran is just one of the two primary sources (the messages received by Muhammad), you'd have to read Sunnah for the deeds of Muhammad during which he received the messages (the second primary source). It's only there that you'd find the beheadings and stonings by Muhammad. Just like "the New testament" isn't just one of the gospels, but the four gospels and all the other books, including the Apocalypse of John and all the epistles. Sunnah are also searchable online.
- jnbiche 11y ago
  > Quran is just one of the two primary sources (the messages received by Muhammad), you'd have to read Sunnah for the deeds of Muhammad during which he received the messages (the second primary source) Are you addressing this to me, in response to my comment, or to HN in general?
  - acqq 11y ago
    You said "I was encouraging someone wondering about the Quran to read it himself so he could make up his own mind," well, just reading just the Quran is not enough, as a such a reader would miss all the behadings and stonings of unbelievers by Muhammad and his soldiers that are the part of the primary sources of the religion.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - ern 11y ago
      The only laypeople who use the Koran and Hadiths as sources for direct personal understanding of Islam are literalist Salafist/Wahhabist types including ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Islamic exegesis, which has led to the day to day fiqh that governs religious life for the vast majority of Moslems is a very complex field that has evolved over more than a 1000 years and takes years of study to master and is not as straightforward as you are portraying it. The "CTRL-F...gotcha!" approach that you seem to be advocating would be regarded as absurd not only by Moslems, but by anyone who has to deal with the interpretation of complex texts. A layperson with no knowledge of Arabic and lacking the toolkit for understanding is not going to get very far in understanding Islam using Hadiths and the Koran, and you'd be doubly disadvantaged using an English translation. An analogy would be the average American citizen, unschooled in law, being asked to derive the Miranda Warning from the Bill of Rights, or providing a reasoned opinion about the scope of the Interstate Commerce clause. Sure, it's great from a Civics perspective to read the Constitution, but if interpreting it was straightforward we'd be able to shutter the Supreme Court.
      - acqq 11y ago
        > The only laypeople who use the Koran and Hadiths as sources for direct personal understanding of Islam are literalist Salafist/Wahhabist types including ISIS and Al-Qaeda. And Saudi Arabia which finances with billions (?) of dollars the religious education of Muslims around the world? Even in the Muslim religious education in the countries which don't use Sharia the first thing the kids learn is to differentiate themselves from unbelievers. Then even as the layperson you can easily count how many statements there are in the holy book in which the Unbelievers are "liers" and will be "painfully punished" for which is "fire" etc. It's not written in parables or anything it's completely and plainly explicit. Ditto for the practices of stoning, beheading in Sunnah etc. The layperson doesn't have to practice Islam, or know their religious discussions to get the rough idea of the content.
        11y ago

by jnbiche 11y ago

acqq 11y ago

Yes, reading the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Quran and comparing them is really instructive. However Quran is just one of the two primary sources (the messages received by Muhammad), you'd have to read Sunnah for the deeds of Muhammad during which he received the messages (the second primary source). It's only there that you'd find the beheadings and stonings by Muhammad. Just like "the New testament" isn't just one of the gospels, but the four gospels and all the other books, including the Apocalypse of John and all the epistles. Sunnah are also searchable online.

jnbiche 11y ago
> Quran is just one of the two primary sources (the messages received by Muhammad), you'd have to read Sunnah for the deeds of Muhammad during which he received the messages (the second primary source) Are you addressing this to me, in response to my comment, or to HN in general?
- acqq 11y ago
  You said "I was encouraging someone wondering about the Quran to read it himself so he could make up his own mind," well, just reading just the Quran is not enough, as a such a reader would miss all the behadings and stonings of unbelievers by Muhammad and his soldiers that are the part of the primary sources of the religion.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - ern 11y ago
    The only laypeople who use the Koran and Hadiths as sources for direct personal understanding of Islam are literalist Salafist/Wahhabist types including ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Islamic exegesis, which has led to the day to day fiqh that governs religious life for the vast majority of Moslems is a very complex field that has evolved over more than a 1000 years and takes years of study to master and is not as straightforward as you are portraying it. The "CTRL-F...gotcha!" approach that you seem to be advocating would be regarded as absurd not only by Moslems, but by anyone who has to deal with the interpretation of complex texts. A layperson with no knowledge of Arabic and lacking the toolkit for understanding is not going to get very far in understanding Islam using Hadiths and the Koran, and you'd be doubly disadvantaged using an English translation. An analogy would be the average American citizen, unschooled in law, being asked to derive the Miranda Warning from the Bill of Rights, or providing a reasoned opinion about the scope of the Interstate Commerce clause. Sure, it's great from a Civics perspective to read the Constitution, but if interpreting it was straightforward we'd be able to shutter the Supreme Court.
    - acqq 11y ago
      > The only laypeople who use the Koran and Hadiths as sources for direct personal understanding of Islam are literalist Salafist/Wahhabist types including ISIS and Al-Qaeda. And Saudi Arabia which finances with billions (?) of dollars the religious education of Muslims around the world? Even in the Muslim religious education in the countries which don't use Sharia the first thing the kids learn is to differentiate themselves from unbelievers. Then even as the layperson you can easily count how many statements there are in the holy book in which the Unbelievers are "liers" and will be "painfully punished" for which is "fire" etc. It's not written in parables or anything it's completely and plainly explicit. Ditto for the practices of stoning, beheading in Sunnah etc. The layperson doesn't have to practice Islam, or know their religious discussions to get the rough idea of the content.
      - 11y ago