Hello Folks, Fawzia here! I was a Quranist for 10 months.
-
It's true, you were being condescending, I didn't say she wasn't. Those two aren't mutually exclusive. It's possible for you to say the same thing in a non condescending manner, isn't it.
I thought what separated the Free-minds forum from others is that all points of view are welcome, as long as they are not insulting posts directed at a single individual. She didn't attack you personally, so if you wish, you may correct her by posting your points to the best of your knowledge. How did she make you, specifically, her 'verbal toilet'
I really don?t get you. How am I being condescending? It?s not like I went ?hey, you read translations, therefore you?re automatically wrong?. THAT would be condescending. I?m calling out this person for the ATTITUDE she displays. She wants to choose a side, fine. But don?t go calling us apologists when she doesn?t know her behind from her elbow and doesn?t even think its worth the bother to learn what is necessary. And if she does, don?t expect us to give a gandhi-smile and say ?would you like the other cheek too?? Sorry but that?s not how it works. If you come across nice, you?ll get nice words back. I honestly don?t mind criticism. What I mind is when people want to get something off their chest by belittling the faith of others. That?s really wrong. You want to be critical, fine (great even) but be SUBSTANTIALLY critical. Fawzia-critical = rantings, at best.
I dunno if you notice, but there are some atheists, haters, anti-religious people who come in here with their emotional-offload agenda. They don?t enough venting time at home so they come here and have a good time at our expense. This makes us their verbal toilets. As far as I can see, Fawzia is a fake. She was never a Quranist. She looks down on Quranists for ?desperately trying to salvage our faith by junking hadith?. Well if a person thinks of Quranists this way, don?t be expecting some kind of hare krishna like song and dance from the Quranists. She thinks we?re idiots and she has no time to tell us why. Wow, you gotta love the benevolence there, doncha. Mother Theresa herself would be aspiring to such compassion.
-
I really don?t get you. How am I being condescending? It?s not like I went ?hey, you read translations, therefore you?re automatically wrong?. THAT would be condescending. I?m calling out this person for the ATTITUDE she displays. She wants to choose a side, fine. But don?t go calling us apologists when she doesn?t know her behind from her elbow and doesn?t even think its worth the bother to learn what is necessary. And if she does, don?t expect us to give a gandhi-smile and say ?would you like the other cheek too?? Sorry but that?s not how it works. If you come across nice, you?ll get nice words back. I honestly don?t mind criticism. What I mind is when people want to get something off their chest by belittling the faith of others. That?s really wrong. You want to be critical, fine (great even) but be SUBSTANTIALLY critical. Fawzia-critical = rantings, at best.
I dunno if you notice, but there are some atheists, haters, anti-religious people who come in here with their emotional-offload agenda. They don?t enough venting time at home so they come here and have a good time at our expense. This makes us their verbal toilets. As far as I can see, Fawzia is a fake. She was never a Quranist. She looks down on Quranists for ?desperately trying to salvage our faith by junking hadith?. Well if a person thinks of Quranists this way, don?t be expecting some kind of hare krishna like song and dance from the Quranists. She thinks we?re idiots and she has no time to tell us why. Wow, you gotta love the benevolence there, doncha. Mother Theresa herself would be aspiring to such compassion.
Wanted to echo Sarah's thoughts. You are not responding peacefully abdalquran. Me saying that does not equate to me agreeing with Fawzia's beliefs, or even condoning Fawzia's approach/condescension. You do not have to meet her condescension with condescension of your own. You don't have to be sarcastic. Like Sarah said, the tone of your posts can be off-putting and tends to weaken your arguments.
The worshipers of the Most Gracious are those who tread the earth gently, and when the ignorant speak to them, they only utter peace. 2563
-
If you come across nice, you?ll get nice words back. I honestly don?t mind criticism. What I mind is when people want to get something off their chest by belittling the faith of others. That?s really wrong. You want to be critical, fine (great even) but be SUBSTANTIALLY critical. Fawzia-critical = rantings, at best.
As far as I can see, Fawzia is a fake. She was never a Quranist. She looks down on Quranists for ?desperately trying to salvage our faith by junking hadith?. Well if a person thinks of Quranists this way, don?t be expecting some kind of hare krishna like song and dance from the Quranists. She thinks we?re idiots and she has no time to tell us why. Wow, you gotta love the benevolence there, doncha. Mother Theresa herself would be aspiring to such compassion.
That's not true, let me remind you of this http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599050.msg224172#msg224172
You didn't come up with a good reason as to why this version should even be in print, and you even suggested that it's only printed in some small enclave of North Africa (not true, since the one I saw at home was bought in Saudi Arabia by my dad's friend.). You were being rude to me, even though I was never rude to you. I was nice to you, but I did not get nice words back.
You don't know if she is a fake, she may be, but maybe not. I would ignore her, since she doesn't have anything useful points to make, although she has brought up one good question about the 'milk siblings' verse. In my opinion, the best way to treat people who are like this, is to break their arguments down one by one, be polite while doing so, and if they don't change their attitude, ignore them, since by then they have proved themselves to be people who are unwilling to learn.
-
welcome Fawzia,
I think the core problem is your view of the terms "Islam" and "Muslim", and you thinking that they are proper nouns. Also, looking at Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. for a representation of islam is not a good start.
See
http//www.free-minds.org/peacefulness
http//www.free-minds.org/node/10
http//islamicreform.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=45&Itemid=53 -
The worshipers of the Most Gracious are those who tread the earth gently, and when the ignorant speak to them, they only utter peace. 2563
Thank you so much for that verse, caveman doctor, I was looking for it for a long time. peace angel group
@ abdulquran, one takes things lying down when one doesn't provide a refutation, but the refutation itself can be said in a polite manner. You can be gentle in demeanor, but firm in belief
Peace
Sarah
-
welcome Fawzia,
I think the core problem is your view of the terms "Islam" and "Muslim", and you thinking that they are proper nouns. Also, looking at Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. for a representation of islam is not a good start.
See
http//www.free-minds.org/peacefulness
http//www.free-minds.org/node/10
http//islamicreform.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=45&Itemid=53exactly
-
That's not true, let me remind you of this http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599050.msg224172#msg224172
You didn't come up with a good reason as to why this version should even be in print, and you even suggested that it's only printed in some small enclave of North Africa (not true, since the one I saw at home was bought in Saudi Arabia by my dad's friend.). You were being rude to me, even though I was never rude to you. I was nice to you, but I did not get nice words back.
Sorry, that's not rude. Thats just not taking the usual sceptics line for granted, lol. If you think I was rude, kindly point it out and if I agree, I will apologise.
As for Warsh, you, your dad, your dad's friend, his friend, his friend's friend and etc ad nauseum is not evidence for me. I checked with the saudis myself on this and other than for qiraat studies (very minor branch in universities) they don't even allow this to be recited in masajid. We can open up that subject again in another thread if you want.
-
The worshipers of the Most Gracious are those who tread the earth gently, and when the ignorant speak to them, they only utter peace. 2563
Actually I got to differ from you on that. Firstly Fawzia is not simply jaahil as per 25/63. (jahiloon are people who are superficial and unable to penetrate the core of things). Fawzia is a racist who also came to incite. Her tone betrays that hostility and I invoke 4/148 as proof of my policies for her
Allah loveth not that evil should be noised abroad in public speech, EXCEPT WHERE INJUSTICE HAS BEEN DONE; for Allah is He who heareth and knoweth all things
So while I respect your comment, I'm sorry but I see this very differently.
-
Fawzia's slight arrogance and tone reflects her insecurity and her inner fear from the unknown.
It is fine.
I have seen worse.
But you will notice that Muslims who leave Islam become very hostile and even worse than the people who are born non-muslims. This could be true to all religions.
The worst atheists and critics of Christianity for example are ex-Christians.
They simply want to feel good about their choice and to look down on people who didn't adopt their rebellion.
Actually some of us did the same to the Sunnis.
Aren't humans a bunch of predictable losers??
-
As for Warsh, you, your dad, your dad's friend, his friend, his friend's friend and etc ad nauseum is not evidence for me. I checked with the saudis myself on this and other than for qiraat studies (very minor branch in universities) they don't even allow this to be recited in masajid. We can open up that subject again in another thread if you want.
i was referring to the whole thread, it seems to me that you are the only one who doesn't see how rude you come across in your posts.
Who told you that the Warsh version is not recited in the mosque? It is, because it is considered to be an authentic reading of the Quran, even though it is a variant.
Explain to me why this variant is even in print today, if it's not acceptable.
-
i was referring to the whole thread, it seems to me that you are the only one who doesn't see how rude you come across in your posts.
Who told you that the Warsh version is not recited in the mosque? It is, because it is considered to be an authentic reading of the Quran, even though it is a variant.
Explain to me why this variant is even in print today, if it's not acceptable.
you can look away from evidence, and pretend it isn't evidence, but that doesn't change the fact that it is in PRINT.
-
???
-
i was referring to the whole thread, it seems to me that you are the only one who doesn't see how rude you come across in your posts.
I?m the ONLY one? So you?ve asked the entire Free-minds community? Wow, you must?ve done a lot of pm work. Either that you consider your opinions as the democratic consensus?
Who told you that the Warsh version is not recited in the mosque? It is, because it is considered to be an authentic reading of the Quran, even though it is a variant.
Oh, it was a friend of a friend of a donkey of a friend of a friend of a friend. But that?s evidence according to you. Unless of course you meant, YOUR friends (and parents) only? I dunno, since you consider yourself the democractic consensus then anything's possible.
Explain to me why this variant is even in print today, if it's not acceptable.
Because Sunnis accept it as a variant thanks to the hadith of 7 ahruf. However, it is not the dominant ?rescension?, not even close. Even your much sought after ?which quran? article author admits that.
-
you can look away from evidence, and pretend it isn't evidence, but that doesn't change the fact that it is in PRINT.
YES ! Exactly. That's the intelligence of the God of the Quran. The minute someone modifies the text and PRINTS some copies, automatically his 'protection' of the Quran is nullified. Some 'knower of the known and unseen' He is, huh ?
Take RK's 'sans 9/128-129' as proof of corruption as well. You may as well use it. Also, since there are other books which QUOTE the Quran, that's like printing the Quran without the rest of the Quran so THAT'S proof too, lol.
Jeez.....
-
could you have said this differently?
No I can't cuz it was a talking donkey. However, that doesn't diminish the validity of my evidence because in the mythical world of the internet, your dad's friend (and for that matter, you) are as mythical as my friend of a friend's talking donkey. Nothing but typeface on screen.
-
Because Sunnis accept it as a variant thanks to the hadith of 7 ahruf. However, it is not the dominant ?rescension?, not even close. Even your much sought after ?which quran? article author admits that.
provide me with relevant articles and hadiths. How am I to know what you are talking about if all you doubt is shout and make wild accusations about me 'pm'ing everyone?
-
could you have said this differently?
don't worry, donkey is very innocent and cute animal
http//www.starstore.com/acatalog/Shrek_2_Donkey_poster.jpg
-
That's not true, let me remind you of this http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599050.msg224172#msg224172
You didn't come up with a good reason as to why this version should even be in print, and you even suggested that it's only printed in some small enclave of North Africa (not true, since the one I saw at home was bought in Saudi Arabia by my dad's friend.).
How far has this Warsh variant travelled, it's clearly not just in North Africa. Explain to me why it is not justified, considering how old it is, and the fact that they didn't have a computerised system then to record things in an error free manner.