Are we, really bigots?
-
Another horrible Lambda Unitarian story. P My writing is mainly for those who are already Monotheists. I don't know hadith that well, and I don't know Arabic, so I'll be at disadvantage arguing with Sunnis, except by copying what others write. Well, still, I'll possibly be a pastor in a Unitarian church, if God wills. Here, I'll use my example to warn fellow monotheists Are we really bigots like those who set up partners are?
I had a horrible online quarrel with a Sunni last night. Later, at 8 pm, my Christian mom rushed in, and drove me out for dinner, and spoke to the Sunni scholar in my name. After dinner, my mom told me, "You can't argue like that. He doesn't care about theory. He's forcing you his opinion, so I force him my opinion. I don't care what he says, I'll just impose my opinions."
Today, I read the online record of our conversation, I found how similar the Sunni bigot and the Christian bigot (my mom) are. To be honest, my mom possibly totaled my reputation among Sunnis by showing her Christian bigotry under my name.
At first, I thought he was an atheist interested in Abrahamic religions. I told him that I don't put my sole trust in Bible, since I found contradictions in Bible, and I found Trinity not logical. Then, I told him that I prefer the Quran, for it's more scientific than Bible, and I reject Hadith, because it conflicts with Quran. He agreed with my Bible argument; New Testament was not written by Disciples, and the authors who fabricated Gospel claimed that Holy Spirit was helping them in writing, but when it came to Hadith, I knew that he must be Sunni.
Firstly, I told him my Sunni experience; how I got befuddled because of Hadith. He told me that self-studying Quran and Hadith will cause confusion (I reject this claim. He's just emphasizing the importance of Imam, because his claim implies that Quran can't guide, Hadith can't guide, but we need an imam to be guided. That's how imams instill their teachings. BTW, in universities, students mainly teach themselves; professors just ask them to read and experiment, and professors can discuss with students, not instill.)
I quoted some Hadiths, well, those used in Nineteen God's Signature in Nature and Scripture to deride traditional Muslims, and told him how the Middle East was using these Hadiths to oppress women and non-Muslims. He justified them by asserting that the Middle East and terrorists were not acting according to Quran and Hadith, and that Christians from Russia and US oppressed Muslims first (I reject this claim. What about Rashad Khalifa? He's not a Christian. Muslims got Dr. Khalifa, Salman Rushdi and my mentor Edip Yuksel fatwas just because they revealed Hadith's faults. Those bigots can't listen to opposing opinions.).
I then told him how unreliable Hadiths are; they're hearsay. He said that Bukhari even dreamed about Muhammad talking to him when he became confused.
He believed that Hadith was revealed by God, since Muhammad doesn't speak for himself. He quoted 532 to claim that Muhammad committed no error (I reject this claim because Chapter 33 and 937 indicate Muhammad's errors. Chapter 53 echoes the examples of people who reject their messengers and claim their messengers to be mad. He took the verse out of context.)
I questioned the practices in Hadith. He said that Hadith authors were influenced by medieval Arab culture. I used some Quran verses that claims that Quran is complete and sufficient in detail and the example of Christian church to claim that Sunnis make stuff too inflexible. He said that it was not Christianity that respects women (he didn't address the verses), but it was the Greeks, and that Quran says that it has some difficult and mysterious verses (I further reject this claim on ground of 37. His argument implies that we need Hadith to understand Quran. But 37 says that the definite signs are the essence, and there're multiple-meaning verses. Definite signs don't need Hadith's explanation, and the essence of Quran is Monotheism, and all Monotheists can achieve salvation (2112). Members of the "jury," do you think that Sunni scholar is among the people who eager to derive their interpretation based on Hadith and imams to cause confusion?), and that Muhammad started preaching 10 years before revelation of Quran (I reject this claim because 4066; 4252; 482; 937 indicate that Muhammad didn't acknowledge before revelation of Quran).
I said that it's God who explains difficult verses, not Muhammad, on ground of 7519. He said that Muhammad never spoke of himself, and we should practice what the last messenger does (I reject this claim because Muhammad is the last prophet, but nowhere in Quran suggests that he is the last messenger).
I questioned the status of women in 21st century Islamic nations. He said that they're not following Islam, but it's the Arab culture that caused the phenomenon. I still quoted the hadith that equated women with black dogs and donkeys and women prostrating to their husbands. He said that black dogs are devils, women distract men, women prostrate to men was the rite in medieval Arab (I reject this claim because if Hadith was revealed by God, then why is it limited by time and region? If such things did happen in medieval Arab, and such tradition is not Islamic as claimed by that Sunni scholar, then many Hadiths should be abrogated. Why don't they abrogate?), but he never explained the donkeys. Then my mom rushed in.I read what my mom said. She claimed that only Bible was revelation of God, and it's Christianity that brought US advanced technology and economy. He said that in Bible, women have very low status, and there're lots of violence in Bible, and a South Korean Evangelist pastor in his area knew nothing, and it's Greek culture that brought West democracy instead of Christianity. My mom said, "You are but a poor Chinese who doesn't reason and goes astray."
He, "I just guess that you're Christian. When Christians have no words to argue with me, they start to curse. Who is that who claimed Bible fraudulent and now claim only Bible should be used as guidance?" Mom, "See how violent Muslims are!"
He, "Are Christians advocating love? Are Crusaders and Spanish Inquisition advocating love? You little girl going to USA is easily fooled. Your argument is full of contradictions. Who is that just argued how unreliable Bible is, and now advocate the Bible?
Mom, "My lord is not your lord."
He, "Oh Trinity! You gullible people follow Mark, Luke, Paul, the enemy of Jesus. You will go to hell."
Mom, "That how Islam is backward. You curse people, while we seek to save your soul. You're not openminded to other religions."
He, "So you Christians accept polytheism? Paul killed real Christians at first, then corrupts God's system."
Mom, "I seek to save you from your deep confusion."
He, "You are confused. You believe in Trinity. We believe in God, and His messengers Muhammad, Jesus, Abraham, Moses, and etc. You commit idolatry by saying Jesus is God."
Mom, "You are deeply befuddled."
He, "Go back to your hell, Christian! You just choose Hadiths carefully selected and translated by Crusaders. The Bible is more violent."
Mom, "In the name of Jesus, let Satan get out from that guy!"
He, "Let Satan get out from than girl!"
Mom, "You curse, but I pray for your guidance!"
He, "I pray for your guidance!"
Mom, "You're controlled by Satan! Stop polluting my soul!" Then she unfriended him online, and asked me to unfriend any Sunnis and any strangers.
He add some further cursing words, and left.From this story, I see something in common between bigots. The Sunni scholar never questioned Hadith, and my Christian mom never questioned Bible. Hadith become "authentic" because of dead Muhammad talking to Bukhari, and Gospel becomes "authentic" because Holy Spirit guided the authors. Both Hadith and NT were written more than a century after the messenger's departure. Sunni rejects NT because of that, but claims Hadith authentic in spite of the long time after Muhammad's departure, because Bukhari's collecting method is reliable. Christians will likewise reject that claim by asserting that when NT was written, people who bear witness to Jesus's life didn't all die, so NT authors didn't dare to fabricate, and all versions of NT from 2nd Century AD are the same. The Sunni facilitated the frauds in Bible and history of Christianity to argue against the Christian, and the Christians facilitates frauds in Hadith and terrorism to argue against Muslims. The Sunni rejects that claim by asserting that terrorists can't exemplify Muslims and that Muhammad was sinless, and Christians can likewise claim that the medieval Church can't exemplify Christians, and that Jesus was sinless. Note that how similar those corresponding claims are! Only the names are different! When they both run out of words, they curse each other.
Another thing to note is that, the Sunni claimed that Christian did not reason, and the Christian claimed that the Sunni was befuddled. In fact, through the perspective of a Monotheist, they both don't reason, but they both think they're on the right path.
However, are we sure that we are indeed on the right path? Are we sure that we are indeed those who reason? I think I almost lost my case against the Sunni, because I simply copied and pasted other scholar's opinions against Hadith, without questioning those opinions; Because I don't at first know Hadith well before picking its frauds; because I don't even know Quran well enough to rebut some of the Sunni's claims; because as I think Protestant Christianity is the religion relatively close to God's teaching available in China, I go to Christian church every Sunday and I've got some Christian influence... I only came up with what's in the brackets rejecting the Sunni scholar's arguments after more research. I've got some bigotry in myself! Such did happen not too long ago; some Submitters turned out to hold Rashad Khalifa infallible after his departure, and their arguments against the Sunni is exactly the same as what the Christian says.
We should objectively examine ourselves. Thorough the Quran, God cited numerous of examples of how people rejected their messengers with bigotry. I just finished the Chinese reformist translation based on English reformist translations and an Arabic Quran of Chapter 2. I think the topic of Chapter 2 is to cite the examples of Children of Israel who didn't really follow Moses and distorted their text and bigots following what has been distorted who then reject the new Book authenticating what was already with them to warn real Monotheists not to blindly follow and to contrast what real Monotheism is. Really, if those people had no bigotry on what's been distorted, they would have had no problem accepting the new Book, since the new Book has basically the same things the previous books preached, which is Monotheism. Chapter 2 cited those examples of Children of Israel in the first half, and in the other half states what real Monotheists should do, by examples of Abraham and Saul, and plain theories. Note 2113 "The Jews said, 'The Nazarenes have no basis,' and the Nazarenes said, 'The Jews have no basis,' while they are both reciting the book! Similarly, those who do not know have said the same thing. God will judge between them on the day of Resurrection in what they disputed. " Is that not like the arguments between bigots in 21st century?
Are we engaging in that kind of argument? Are we not questioning our belief just like those who rejected the messengers did? Are we believing in everything scholars like Dr. Khalifa and Edip Yuksel says without knowledge, in violation of 1736? Do we not dare to listen to Muslim, Christian, Atheist and etc.'s voices against Monotheism? If your answers are yes, please examine yourselves Am I a real Monotheist? On Day of Judgement, leaders will reject their blind followers, and followers hope that they could have rejected the leaders, but it's too late.BTW, we can even question what we read in Quran. There're different versions of Arabic Quran, Hafs and Warfs, and the differences in spellings and numberings between them can cause different understandings. I acknowledge Code 19, which points out errors in spellings and numberings, and we can use Code 19 to check if everything is right. However, we'd better check ourselves whether Code 19 is indeed truth. If you don't know Arabic like I am, we may compare different opinions of different scholars, and use our logic. Translations can also be wrong. We need an active mind, so we can find out what's contradicting the context, or facts, or what's illogical. I recommend you read a lot of pages at a time with a critical mind, so we'll not take things out of context, and contexts can help us to understand. I also recommend comparative reading of Quran and Bible, and read widely (3918; Chapter 96). Don't fear coming across ideas rejecting God, for the truth does not fear doubt, and if you doubt what's clear to be the truth, then you must be committing bigotry.
If we do examine ourselves, and ensure that we are indeed Monotheists, then people have no space to argue with us. Here, I'm also asking you guys a question Should "people of the book" stand for Jews and Christians? Or should it stand for everyone who has the Book?
-
The answers lie in history. It's amazing how history repeats itself. God made it so obvious to see, yet most people choose to stay blind. The Jews added man made books to their scriptures. They took their priests as partners to God. Jesus was sent to put an end to their deception. The followers of Jesus turned him into a God and created a man made scripture. Muhammad was sent to bring an infallible scripture from God. The Muslims weren't content with this and added man made books and changed their religion. Now the scholars and imams have all the power, making up laws as they see fit. So we're right back to the days of the Jewish pharisees, except now they're known as Ulema (Muslim scholars). The Sunnis, the Christians, the Jews, they're all the same. They're following the word of man and ignoring the word of God. None of them believe in the day of judgment. You can't argue with them logically because they have no intention of genuinely seeking the truth.
-
"Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Apostle of God, and the Seal of the Prophets and God has full knowledge of all things. (The Noble Quran, 3340)"
this verse solidifies that Muhammad is the last messenger
That's still "prophets." Prophets and messengers are not all the same. So the last prophet is not necessarily the last messenger. You can have a look at
http//www.free-minds.org/messengers-and-prophets -
Peace,
It was a thoughtful post, Lambda. And I reacted when you said that Bukhari allegedly saw Muhammad in a dream which contradict the Quran. The dead do not have any contact with this world says the Quran.
But you are right, if we are too attached to our label it is easy to get into pointless discussions as in the case with your mother and this Sunni muslim. They were not discussing religion, just flaming each other for various problems in existence attributing them to their respective sects.
Many stray people are impossible to discuss with and they will not change their ways. But you often need to focus on the general Message of the Quran because people always argue about the details, at least when you initiate talk about the religion. Focus on things which are less likely to be able to be misinterpred, so-called dumb-proof facts. It may help to ask rhetorical questions.
Remember, many people may refuse everything you say in pride at the moment of discussion, but may privately ponder on it afterwards and eventually may find what you originally said to be true.
God bless you