Um... OK. But what I really have my hook baited for (so to speak) is anyone who might read and react to my critique of the Faith Goldy column, "Musleh Khan must be removed from his new position as the Muslim Chaplain for the Toronto police", published online on The Rebel.
That was Ground Zero for this discussion thread. The Original Post. The inspiration for "Ok to marry a 9 year old say Muslim Chaplain for the Toronto police".
Um... OK. But what I really have my hook baited for (so to speak) is anyone who might read and react to my critique of the Faith Goldy column, "Musleh Khan must be removed from his new position as the Muslim Chaplain for the Toronto police", published online on The Rebel.
That was Ground Zero for this discussion thread. The Original Post. The inspiration for "Ok to marry a 9 year old say Muslim Chaplain for the Toronto police".
The question, if I understand the last two posts, is whether Musleh Khan believes it is "OK to marry a 9-year old girl."
?
Better to have Musleh Khan himself answer the question. He did just that, when he was speaking at a mosque (in Canada), in 2015. I am duplicating his answer from CIJNews. I'd rather just provide the link, but so often, I have to wonder how many of us who enter into these discussions are diligent enough to use the links that are provided, as often as they should. But I will duplicate his answer so that no one will be able to say "I tried to access his answer, but the link didn't work."
In a Q&A session in 2015 at Ummah Nabawiah Mosque in Etobicoke, Ontario, Musleh Khan said that it is permissible in Islam to marry a 9-year-old girl, but the implementation of this has its time and place. The following are excerpts from Khan’s answer:
Question: [Aisha] was 9-year-old… she was young and why is this it allowed?
Musleh Khan: OK, you tell me what the age is to get married. What is the age that you should get married? Puberty. What else?
What’s the age here in Toronto in Canada to get married? What’s the minimum age? 16 with parental consent. Right?
You actually have to have a guardian to sign a document that allows you to get married at that age. When you’re I believe 18 then you can do it on your own. In some parts of Europe it’s 15, OK. In some parts of Africa it’s even lower than that. Everywhere you go in the world you’re finding different ages.
So what is the real age to get married, if it’s so different everywhere you go? The answer [is from] our Prophet, Mohammad... who married Aisha when she was at the age of puberty.
Now wait--because for some people who don’t understand this, they’ve already gotten the heart attack. So let’s just explain ourselves here. The first mistake you make with this issue is [to equate] that time [when the Prophet lived] to 2015.
Don’t compare that time [600] to 2015. A 9 or 10-year-old back then is what most 25 and 30-year olds are, now. The maturity level is completely different.
People in this day and age mature very slowly. That’s why you have guys that are still living at home. They’re like 35 years older still playing video games. They don’t want to get married, they can’t get a job; they can’t do this, they can’t do that.
But back then, 9-year olds were mature enough and [they] could get married. [They] could have a child.
Our society is so socially poisoned, then when we hear that figure [a 9-year-old girl], we jump at the conclusion right away, without looking at the circumstance, without looking at the culture... Statistically, guess how many 9-year olds [have been] married from the time of the Prophet... until today.
Guess how many 9-year olds in the world have been married. Less than one percent. It’s literally nothing, from [today], all the way [back] to the Prophet...
I don’t know anybody who’s done this, and I honestly believe that the average Muslim doesn’t even know anybody who’s done this. Why? Because our culture doesn’t allow or know how to accept that practice today. If you try to implement that practice today, you’re going to get into a lot of problems.
However, your belief (عقيدة) is, if the Prophet did it, then you have to believe that it was permissible. It’s permitted in our Sharia [Islamic Law] but it has its time and place.
That’s [how I explain it] to non-Muslims.
Yes, it’s in our Sharia [Islamic Law], but we don’t shove it down anyone’s throat. We don’t tell people: Hey, make sure, you know, this is also a candidate as well. We don’t do that.
No Islamic culture in the world is doing this. Why? Because the times today are different. That’s what I would say to a non-Muslim.
rinselberg So Musleh Khan said that to marry a 9-year old girl "has its time and place", but the only time and place that he provided for an example is the time when the Prophet lived (570 to 632 CE) and (by implication) the place where the Prophet lived: the Arabian Peninsula.
Then he said that no Islamic culture in the world is doing this.
Now I won't say that he is completely accurate with that statement, because we do know of Muslims in certain countries arranging marriages for young girls, even as young as the age of 9. But the fact that he said "no Islamic culture in the world is doing this" tells me that he is not saying that this is an "OK" option.
He knows that there are Muslim nations around the world, or areas within certain Muslim nations, where it is legally permissible. But it's not "OK", because--as he explained himself, in the words that I just duplicated from the CIJNews article--young people today need many more years to develop an adult mentality, than they did during the times of the Prophet.
The Rebel's Faith Goldy, who worked up that "hit piece" against Musleh Khan, is seen here to be a proven miscreant. She deceives, using the tricks and wiles of the Art of Spin.
It’s permitted in our Sharia [Islamic Law] but it has its time and place.
But he says it is "permitted" (directly from your post). Sure he also says has it's time and place - but what exactly does that mean? Today, tomorrow, next week?
Just because he is saying that he knows no one practicing this act does not mean it is not mean it is happening (as you are always so quick to point out) - he was also put on the spot where if he said he knew people that had/have practice this them all hell would break loose - who is to say he isn't covering his/their asses?
Are you 100% sure he is not hiding anything or has an agenda? You say everyone else has.
I can't be 100 percent sure of anything about Musleh Khan.
I am 100 percent sure that The Rebel and The Rebel's Faith Goldy have not presented a coherent report about Musleh Khan that matches up with these transcripts (video and text) of what he is known to have said, and also published online, about the husband-wife relationship and about what is an "OK" age for a girl to be married.
Are you ready to put your "Mickey_Moose" to the online petition (sign the petition) at the end of Faith Goldy's report in The Rebel, to have Musleh Khan removed from his association as a chaplain with the Toronto Police Departmnet?
Obviously your "call", but if it were me--I wouldn't do it.
I would like to know more about the kind of interactions this Musleh Khan has been having (or is expected to be having) as a chaplain with the Toronto PD. His first day was October 28, 2016. With the way that this thread has "gotten hold of me", I probably will know more. There's a brief video segment that accompanies one of the media reports that I cited, about his having been named as a chaplain. I haven't had time to treat myself to that video.
As far as this idea that you just put forward, that maybe the "time and place" for girls to be married at the age of 9 years, or younger than the ages that are now legal and customary in Canada, could be "just around the corner" or "next week" in the thinking of Musleh Khan--I can't get to that, from his words that I duplicated.
I think that the way that he talked about the differences between the time of the Prophet and today (2015, when he was explaining it), and the way that he said that young people today need far more time to develop into adults than they did in the time of the Prophet, make it clear that he is not thinking, in the back of his mind, "Yeah, not today; but next week, or next year." I don't think that he projects that modern societies like Canada can ever change back to the kinds of societies that prevailed when the Prophet was alive. That just doesn't seem to match (for me), with the way that he explained it--an explanation that was misleadingly abridged by the likes of The Rebel's Faith Goldy.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-24-2017).]
I think you won't sign it because you are afraid you might learn something by being subscribed to The Rebel.
All that right might make you rethink the wrong left.
Of course I did, which probably put me on some libs watch-list.......not like I wasn't already so what's another one. What are they gonna do anyway, send unicorns after me ?
[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 01-24-2017).]
I can't be 100 percent sure of anything about Musleh Khan.
I am 100 percent sure that The Rebel and The Rebel's Faith Goldy have not presented a coherent report about Musleh Khan that matches up with these transcripts (video and text) of what he is known to have said, and also published online, about the husband-wife relationship and about what is an "OK" age for a girl to be married.
Are you ready to put your "Mickey_Moose" to the online petition (sign the petition) at the end of Faith Goldy's report in The Rebel, to have Musleh Khan removed from his association as a chaplain with the Toronto Police Departmnet?
Obviously your "call", but if it were me--I wouldn't do it.
I would like to know more about the kind of interactions this Musleh Khan has been having (or is expected to be having) as a chaplain with the Toronto PD. His first day was October 28, 2016. With the way that this thread has "gotten hold of me", I probably will know more. There's a brief video segment that accompanies one of the media reports that I cited, about his having been named as a chaplain. I haven't had time to treat myself to that video.
As far as this idea that you just put forward, that maybe the "time and place" for girls to be married at the age of 9 years, or younger than the ages that are now legal and customary in Canada, could be "just around the corner" or "next week" in the thinking of Musleh Khan--I can't get to that, from his words that I duplicated.
I think that the way that he talked about the differences between the time of the Prophet and today (2015, when he was explaining it), and the way that he said that young people today need far more time to develop into adults than they did in the time of the Prophet, make it clear that he is not thinking, in the back of his mind, "Yeah, not today; but next week, or next year." I don't think he imagines that modern societies like Canada can change back to the kinds of societies that prevailed when the Prophet was alive. It just doesn't seem to match with the way that he explained it. An explanation that was misleadingly abridged by the likes of The Rebel's Faith Goldy.
Fear. Because Islam is such an expansionist,militant and heavy handed indoctrination for governance. Coupled with the fact that the average Muslim supports extremism by their virtual silence. The percentage muslims active against is laughable in comparison to the whole. The average person in America given the choice does not trust a muslim to follow western standards and laws while here over their propensity to defend Islam in any form. Most people firmly believe that a Muslim will lie anyway regardless of what they say mostly due to the fact that their religion says to.
Fear is the word and besides hunger there is nothing that inspires attention more. Stir all you want. Water and oil will separate.
I can't be 100 percent sure of anything about Musleh Khan.
This MOST DEFINITELY is an accurate account of how rinse represents ANY part of islam. Evidenced by your constant copy paste remarks from various authors who twist and deny coronic texts to fit anti-islamic label "moderate". While the entire time you denounce any faith in islam. If there is just 1 thing you need to learn about islam, it is this; ANY disagreement with muhamid in the coran is the equivalent of calling him a false prophet. Basically setting you apart from the faithful body of believers in islam AND doing so makes you an enemy of islam. There is no such thing as a moderate muslum. They agree with what muhamid did, said and taught or they call him a false prophet.
Uh, with all due respect... I did not start this particular discussion thread.
If you were to check--not suggesting that you should--but if you were to check on more recent times here (on the forum), I participate in these threads; but more often than not, it is someone else who gets the thread started.
If that makes me an "Islamo-pimp" in your estimation, so be it.
I participate in these threads; but more often than not, it is someone else who gets the thread started.
If that makes me an "Islamo-pimp" in your estimation, so be it.
What makes you an incessant islamo-pimp is that you show up in
EVERY SINGLE THREAD
...that has ANYTHING to do with muslims or islam
You appear in those threads with the regularity and predictability of a swarm of flies around a pile of horse dung.
...and you proceed to excuse and defend and obfuscate anything that detracts from islam or muslims, including proffering your own transparent propaganda to support and promote a dogma that you obviously have only an "academic" experience with from your "safe space" in Sunnyvale California.
I respect your right to have your own opinions about anything and everything under the sun. Facts, harder to come by than opinions.
I don't think that you are doing your own opinions justice here. Other than your opinion that "rinselberg is an Islamo-pimp." That, you seem to have covered.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-24-2017).]
I respect your right to have your own opinions about anything and everything under the sun. Facts, harder to come by than opinions.
...said the fellow who constantly cuts & pastes OTHER PEOPLE'S opinions and pretends to be "scholarly" in the process.
You have made it perfectly transparent over the years here that your muslin fetish is a "web based, academic exercise". You even confessed as such not too long ago.
NO Ronald. Facts are not harder to come by than opinions. Well considered and properly formed opinions are based on facts and experience.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-24-2017).]
Pretend to be scholarly? No. Not at all. I post what I think is real, or true. I include copy-and-paste excerpts or page-links to the articles and sometimes videos that are shaping my beliefs.
You just can't seem to get over the fact that we aren't seeing it the same way. Especially when Islam or Muslims are on the table. As I said, for you, this thread is about Islam. For me, it's about the Islam of Musleh Khan. Big difference--in my view.
Why don't you surprise me? Come up with something about Musleh Khan that will (or should) make me say "Wow. I really didn't see that one coming."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-24-2017).]
I don't think that he projects that modern societies like Canada can ever change back to the kinds of societies that prevailed when the Prophet was alive. That just doesn't seem to match (for me), with the way that he explained it
If he doesnt want western civilization to be an "Islamic State". That would be a good thing.
...said the fellow who constantly cuts & pastes OTHER PEOPLE'S opinions and pretends to be "scholarly" in the process.
You have made it perfectly transparent over the years here that your muslin fetish is a "web based, academic exercise". You even confessed as such not too long ago.
Don't forget that has also confessed that he enjoys arguing on this forum and this topic is his corner bell that calls him into action. NOTE, he did not use those exact words, but is an accurate paraphrase of his statement. He sees this type of argument as sharpening his debate "skills". Sad, really that he sees copy paste as intellectual. All the while avoiding the one book that defines islam and turning to opinion writers and quotes from books that attempt to redirect, redefine, and challenge historical and traditional islamic teachings, traditions, culture and principles.
Why don't you surprise me? Come up with something about Musleh Khan that will (or should) make me say "Wow. I really didn't see that one coming."
How about I refuse to play yet *another* game of "whack-a-mole" with you and in the process help feed your obvious fetish.
This is all just an academic game for you.
In all candor, I would love nothing more than to haul you off to Islamabad, Riyadh or Kuala Lampur with me on one of my trips and leave your starry-eyed academic butt there for a few months and then see how *reality* squares with your Silicon Valley fantasy view of muslims.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-25-2017).]
Originally posted by 2.5: If he doesnt want western civilization to be an "Islamic State". That would be a good thing.
He has his own YouTube channel. The good news is that he has uploaded 271 videos. The bad news is that he has uploaded 271 videos. If you get my "drift". I mean, it could be something of a chore to sort through all that, to zero in on some specific question, such as "Does Musleh Khan say it is OK for nine-year old girls to be married?"
Fortunately, I have already "handled" that one for you.
The "grin" means that I take my Pennock's persona seriously, but not too seriously.
Ahem, Mr Randye. I said "Musleh Khan". You got anything specifically on him? Because if you don't, I think you are basically just blowing smoke (or steam) with that "go to Islamabad" line.
Don't forget that has also confessed that he enjoys arguing on this forum and this topic is his corner bell that calls him into action. NOTE, he did not use those exact words, but is an accurate paraphrase of his statement. He sees this type of argument as sharpening his debate "skills". Sad, really that he sees copy paste as intellectual. All the while avoiding the one book that defines islam and turning to opinion writers and quotes from books that attempt to redirect, redefine, and challenge historical and traditional islamic teachings, traditions, culture and principles.
Are you more "read in" to Islam than Musleh Khan?
I cannot offer the Complete Musleh Khan, but I just provided a transcript of part of one of his presentations. About what age is OK for a girl to be married, and how he relates that to the Qur'anic narrative of Mohammed and Aisha.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-24-2017).]
Come on now rinselberg, don't you know it's only acceptable to copy and paste things if they are conservative hatred of muslims that these guys agree with?
Rational thought can't possibly include the opinions of others you know. You have to do all the hard work.
They have to threaten to make you a prisoner of war in some place where they know where there are some bad muslims living, to try and get their point across that because of that, all muslims are bad.
So I hope randye and company will also declare their war on Christianity and Judaism too. Lots of bad apples in those bunches doing the same crap they claim the muslims are doing.
[This message has been edited by dobey (edited 01-24-2017).]
I cannot offer the Complete Musleh Khan, but I just provided a transcript of part of one of his presentations. About what age is OK for a girl to be married, and how he relates that to the Qur'anic narrative of Mohammed and Aisha.
I don't know who he is, and could not care less. Quotes about islam should come from the coran and or hadiths. I have absolutely no problem what so ever about individuals having an opinion or belief on the subject, but to be called a muslum you must believe what mohamid wrote, (after all it supposedly came from his god) NOT hide distort or make excuses for it. Good bad or ugly, a true and faithful muslum is called to defend the teachings of muhamid NOT change his words or their meanings.
I don't know who he is, and could not care less. Quotes about islam should come from the coran and or hadiths. I have absolutely no problem what so ever about individuals having an opinion or belief on the subject, but to be called a muslum you must believe what mohamid wrote, (after all it supposedly came from his god) NOT hide distort or make excuses for it. Good bad or ugly, a true and faithful muslum is called to defend the teachings of muhamid NOT change his words or their meanings.
So what faith are you then? Are you a Christian? Jew? Do you not believe the things in your bible, literally, as they are written?
Come on now rinselberg, don't you know it's only acceptable to copy and paste things if they are conservative hatred of muslims that these guys agree with?
Not true at all, but I am sure you knew that but chose to be sarcastic anyways. I don't think anyone has a problem with people having foot notes and references to the statements made. The issue is that the copy paste from various authors contradict traditional islamic teachings. When this fact is brought up, the response is "moderate muslums......" or "islam is changing". But the worst point in his argument is that copy pasting somebody else's opinions are good enough for him to call himself intellectual or educated or standing up for the voiceless, being their voice or protector. I would have much more respect if the copy paste were accually from the coran and hadith, with HIS OWN explanation of the context. After all, should he be defending something he is ignorant about? Something he has no opinion about? Something he clearly does not even believe in? He does it for the same exact reason other people argue, it's because he enjoys arguing and gets off thinking he is an Internet nija.
Not true at all, but I am sure you knew that but chose to be sarcastic anyways. I don't think anyone has a problem with people having foot notes and references to the statements made. The issue is that the copy paste from various authors contradict traditional islamic teachings. When this fact is brought up, the response is "moderate muslums......" or "islam is changing". But the worst point in his argument is that copy pasting somebody else's opinions are good enough for him to call himself intellectual or educated or standing up for the voiceless, being their voice or protector.
I would have much more respect if the copy paste were accually from the coran and hadith, with HIS OWN explanation of the context.
After all, should he be defending something he is ignorant about? Something he has no opinion about? Something he clearly does not even believe in? He does it for the same exact reason other people argue, it's because he enjoys arguing and gets off thinking he is an Internet nija.
There are the known knowns--the things that we know that we know. There are the known unknowns--the things that we know going in that we do not already have "nailed down". And then there are the unknown unknowns--the things that we do not even know that we do not know.
I do not at all want to be original, in my deconstructions or my analyses of how Muslims think about Islam. I want to be unoriginal--to let the Muslims speak for themselves. In this case, the discussion was started about exactly one Muslim, of the almost two billion on the planet. One Muslim, based in Canada, named Musleh Khan, and recently named by the Toronto Police Department as one of their chaplains.
That is why I posted the transcript of his English-language presentation about whether it is OK for a nine-year old girl to be married. I posted his words. If anyone were to check with the link to CIJNews that I provided at the end of that post, they could see for themselves that it was a copy-and-paste of the transcript of his remarks on this topic; the transcript provided by CIJNews.
The only editing, during that copy-and-paste, was "picky little stuff". I changed some of the punctuation marks. Where the English of the transcript was clumsy and unnecessarily hard to to read, I fixed it up a little. I did not want to change the meaning of the transcript, as best as I could determine how Musleh Khan wanted it to be heard and understood by his audience--it was a spoken presentation, when it happened.
Now I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the transcript from CIJNews. But it is very clear to me that this purports to be a written transcript of the remarks from Musleh Khan, about the same topic (age of marriage) and on the same occasion (Q&A at a mosque) that was used as the raw material for Faith Goldy's column in The Rebel--which is exactly where this discussion first got started.
Can I do any better than that? No. (A rhetorical question.)
I think what's comical (in a way) is Rick (Rickady88GT) constantly insisting that I am not talking about Islam when I argue (or try to argue) my points. That I am not talking about Islam, because I do not argue directly from the verses of the Qur'an.
I base my arguments on what I can read online, or view online at YouTube (etc.), of Muslims that are writing or speaking about what Islam means to them, and how they arrive at such beliefs. In the case of this transcript from Musleh Khan, he was clearly talking about the collection of verses within the Qur'an that are specific to the marriage of Mohammed and his youngest wife, Aisha. He was not breaking it all down during his presentation, "chapter and verse" (as non-Muslims often say, with a nod to the Old or New Testament). He was not going "bottom up" from the specific verses of the Qur'an, one verse at a time, and putting it all together to argue for the "Islamic-ness" of his ideas about the OK age for marriage.
Presumably, Musleh Khan had already done that--schooled himself in the actual verses of the Qur'an--and well before the time of that presentation.
Otherwise, he must be a very accomplished con-man to pass himself off in a way that gets him named (towards the end of 2016) as a Muslim chaplain serving with the Toronto Police Department. Not to mention, having the stage that was given to him inside of that mosque where he was speaking, in 2015. I doubt that he personally owns that mosque, all by himself. He had to convince somebody of his Islamic bona fides, it would seem. I would think that the somebody would have had to have been a Muslim.
Maybe it is terminology preferences that has Rick and myself on very opposite sides about what is a valid way for a non-Muslim like myself to seek an understanding of Islam.
To me, "Islam" is what Muslims believe in today. Now it cannot be "any old" Muslim. It has to be a Muslim of significance. This Musleh Khan has become significant enough to be named as a chaplain serving the Toronto PD. He's significant enough to have become the subject of at least a handful of reports in various media of Canada venues. He has his own YouTube channel with 271 videos to choose from. I would say that he looks to be, not among the Participant Muslims of the West--I think he is too doctrinaire for that role--but a Muslim who is not completely antithetical to the Participant Muslims of the West.
To borrow a terminology that is commonly used in psychopharmacology, I see Shaikh Musleh Khan shaping up as a Participant Muslims of the West agonist, more than a Participant Muslims of the West antagonist. I like that. I think it bodes well for Musleh Khan coming to the end of his earthly travails--not any time soon, Allah be willing--I don't think he has yet arrived at age 40--and then being remembered for living a life that was a net gain for Canada, and not any deficit or burden.
As for Rick--I think I will leave this right here. "Nuff said.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-25-2017).]
If it isn't accepted in the Land it was born and raised in, it isn't traditional. I can't tell the future, but I would be willing to bet that the "moderate" teachers he quotes from do not have much of a following in the Middle East. "Moderate" islam is a Western teaching. It is a mixture of Western Culture and an attempt to evolve islam into the modern age.
You may think I post for attention, but I dont. This is not about me, and it will not become about me or anything other than the topic at hand.
No, the thread is about a single man, not all of Islam. But since you want to make it about all of Islam, let's hear what your faith is. Are you a Christian? Do you call yourself Christian? Do you go to church on Sundays?
If you're going to come in here and attack over a billion people of their faith, it's only fair that you are prepared to defend your own as well.
No, the thread is about a single man, not all of Islam. But since you want to make it about all of Islam, let's hear what your faith is. Are you a Christian? Do you call yourself Christian? Do you go to church on Sundays?
If you're going to come in here and attack over a billion people of their faith, it's only fair that you are prepared to defend your own as well.
I won't play games by your rules, I will stick to the topic of this thread. And the topic is about teachings of islam. Not all of islam, just a little bit of it. Be it one persons teachings or billions. By The Way, I have not "attacked" billions of people, I challenged the liberal interpretation of the coran.
I don't think that I am better than any other person, regardless of the religion they choose. If a person chooses a false religion, that is between them and God, not me. I have never said "kill them all" or "glass parking lot" or even"they are all the same". I believe muslums are just people like you and I.
[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 01-24-2017).]
Originally posted by Rickady88GT: I won't play games by your rules, I will stick to the topic of this thread. And the topic is about teachings of islam. Not all of islam, just a little bit of it. Be it one persons teachings or billions. By The Way, I have not "attacked" billions of people, I challenged the liberal interpretation of the coran.
I don't think that I am better than any other person, regardless of the religion they choose. If a person chooses a false religion, that is between them and God, not me. I have never said "kill them all" or "glass parking lot" or even"they are all the same". I believe muslums are just people like you and I.
No, the topic is Musleh Kahn and *his* teachings. If you want to stick to the topic of the thread, then don't comment if you don't care about what his personal opinions are. The topic is about what he is teaching to the populace which he is serving as a Police Chaplain for. It is not about what some ******* in Iran or Saudi Arabia is teaching to people there.
And please at least have the respect to call it as it is written, the Qu'ran, not "coran" as you spelled it.
You are declaring that his teachings are irrelevant, because you personally believe the teachings of the Qu'ran are what matters, and that he cannot call himself Muslim if he does not teach a literal interpretation of the document. You made that declaration, not I, not any god which you may claim exists or does not exist. You. I'm simply asking you to defend such a claim by presenting your own religious views, in the same thread. If you cannot defend your views and present them as fact, then you do not get to declare the statements of an individual, whom is not present to defend himself, as invalid, simply because your presumed interpretation of a 2000 year old document for which you have presented no evidence that you've actually read, as invalid or irrelevant, simply because it is not what you want to discuss.
If you want to discuss the validity of Islam as a whole, and what the meaning of the teachings of the Qu'ran are, we can do that. Feel free to make a thread. However, this is not that thread. Don't come tell people they are deflecting, when you are exactly the ones who are doing it, and then deny them answers to questions about your own views when asked, because your cowardice is greater than your hatred of another faith.
No, the topic is Musleh Kahn and *his* teachings. If you want to stick to the topic of the thread, then don't comment if you don't care about what his personal opinions are. The topic is about what he is teaching to the populace which he is serving as a Police Chaplain for. It is not about what some ******* in Iran or Saudi Arabia is teaching to people there.
And please at least have the respect to call it as it is written, the Qu'ran, not "coran" as you spelled it.
You are declaring that his teachings are irrelevant, because you personally believe the teachings of the Qu'ran are what matters, and that he cannot call himself Muslim if he does not teach a literal interpretation of the document. You made that declaration, not I, not any god which you may claim exists or does not exist. You. I'm simply asking you to defend such a claim by presenting your own religious views, in the same thread. If you cannot defend your views and present them as fact, then you do not get to declare the statements of an individual, whom is not present to defend himself, as invalid, simply because your presumed interpretation of a 2000 year old document for which you have presented no evidence that you've actually read, as invalid or irrelevant, simply because it is not what you want to discuss.
If you want to discuss the validity of Islam as a whole, and what the meaning of the teachings of the Qu'ran are, we can do that. Feel free to make a thread. However, this is not that thread. Don't come tell people they are deflecting, when you are exactly the ones who are doing it, and then deny them answers to questions about your own views when asked, because your cowardice is greater than your hatred of another faith.
If it isn't accepted in the Land it was born and raised in, it isn't traditional. I can't tell the future, but I would be willing to bet that the "moderate" teachers he quotes from do not have much of a following in the Middle East. "Moderate" islam is a Western teaching. It is a mixture of Western Culture and an attempt to evolve islam into the modern age.
And in what nation is the subject of this discussion a citizen? And which nationality or group of citizens is he talking to?
Libya? Jordan? Saudi Arabia? Yemen? Iraq? Iran?
No. Canada.
I'm Christian, and know many many Christians. I've yet to meet a single one (myself included) that follows every tenet of the bible, especially the Old Testament. If Christians followed "traditional teachings", half the people on this forum and in this country would have already been killed.
