Can You Post this as an Article?
-
This guy satanhatesme obviously just doesn't get it. He thinks he's a defender of Islam but he's really just a defender and blindfollower of one of the many man-made psuedo-Islamic sects.
3120 (This was some of the wisdom Luqman was endowed with.) Do you not realize that Allah has made of service to you all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth? And He has lavished upon you His Blessings, tangible and intangible. And yet, among people are those who argue about Allah without exploring the realm of knowledge, without taking the right approach or a Book giving Light.
3121 And when such people are told to follow what Allah has revealed, they say, "Nay, we follow that which we have found our fathers doing." What! Even though Satan had invited them to the doom of Flames?"
Humbly
Brian
It funny how my character always comes into play when I simply state observations that are true. For example, PM have no consensus for four years. People are hating that statement simply because it true.
Also, I dont want nor need to defend Islam. I talking about PM and its wrongs.
Also, Brian, the Quran is not a weapon. Do throw verses in an attempt to demean and demonize. The Quran wasn't delivered for you to use in that purpose. -
No. Nor did I state that. Read my post carefully. Wakas asked for facts about why Progressive Muslins are 'demolishing' Islam. I presented the definition and show how the term appropriately describes what PM is doing. Zenje, please read and understand before assuming.
So even though I posted your quotes just a page earlier and then explained to you what you had said, since you seem to have forgotten, you still claim you never said it huh? Nice.
Not only that you start insulting me with "retard"? Keep going buddy, true colors showing nicely. yes
-
It funny how my character always comes into play when I simply state observations that are true. For example, PM have no consensus for four years. People are hating that statement simply because it true.
Also, I dont want nor need to defend Islam. I talking about PM and its wrongs.
Also, Brian, the Quran is not a weapon. Do throw verses in an attempt to demean and demonize. The Quran wasn't delivered for you to use in that purpose....and I'm not defending PM. I'm not a member, because its not an organization. I've already acknowledged that it is true that we do not have concensus on a lot of issues. There will always be things we don't agree on, much like the Sunnis and Shias don't have concensus on a lot of issues, and there will probably always be issues the two don't agree on. My problem with you is you are not here to share ideas. You have an obvious agenda, which is to discredit us for rejecting traditionalist thought. Your agenda is partly built on the preconceived notion that "quranists" are an organization (which is close to implying we are a sect). As I've already explained to you, we are like-minded individuals who come hear to share ideas, which means we present our ideas, listen to others ideas, and draw conclusions based on sound evidence (i.e. Qur'an, intelligence, reasoning, etc.). You've mastered giving your opinion, but there's room for much improvement in your ability to listen and reason. A characteristic common among traditionalist. So its obvious we're not your kind of people and you're not our kind of people. So what's your motivation in visiting this site? It appears to be to preach, not to share ideas. That's where your character comes into play. One last thing, the Quran IS a weapon. A weapon to fight falsehood. If you see any falsehood here, bring your proofs from the Quran.
Peace
-
Firstly, for me to find evidence in the KORAN that Progressive Muslin wishes to demolish Islam is a retard request. Also, the rule applies to THE QURAN. Read it carefully before you threaten me with it.
Perhaps you need to read the rules a little more carefully there buddy.The Administrator and Moderator has the final say on all interpretation and implementation of forum rules and guidelines.
-*
-
So even though I posted your quotes just a page earlier and then explained to you what you had said, since you seem to have forgotten, you still claim you never said it huh? Nice. )
Not only that you start insulting me with "retard"? Keep going buddy, true colors showing nicely. yeskeep going bubby? lol!
I didn't call you retard. i said the request was retard. read carefully before assuming...again. A person can be mentally challenge (retarded) and ask a very intelligent question. And a intellect can ask a retarded question. look at the definition. I dont attack people characters like others do to me (Brian), I dont know you and you dont know me. -
The Administrator and Moderator has the final say on all interpretation and implementation of forum rules and guidelines.
Dictatorship? Interesting. yet the name is "free-minds".org? Hmm.
-
My problem with you is you are not here to share ideas. You have an obvious agenda, which is to discredit us for rejecting traditionalist thought. Your agenda is partly built on the preconceived notion that "quranists" are an organization (which is close to implying we are a sect).
You are right. I do have an agenda. Which is to expose that fact that Progressive Muslim have created problems yet produced no answers. This is proven by no consensus in FOUR YEARS. Plus, I dont imply that you are a sect, there needs to be consensus with the majority to be at least be considered as such. But I agree you are a organization. I didnt create the name "Progressive Muslim." They choose it to isolated themselves from others. Dont believe, then what is the big web address at the top of this page says. ProgressiveMuslims.org.
As I've already explained to you, we are like-minded individuals who come hear to share ideas, which means we present our ideas, listen to others ideas, and draw conclusions based on sound evidence (i.e. Qur'an, intelligence, reasoning, etc.). You've mastered giving your opinion, but there's room for much improvement in your ability to listen and reason.
Honestly I listen to reason. I have listen to many in this forum. And I cannot say that another person intrepretation is wrong. Because intrepretation are opinion driven and everyone have the right to there opinion. I simply state the fact that it is an OPINION. And that it is not back by solid proof. Thats why no consensus. Everyone within the PM movement is giving opinion and mostly conjectures.
A characteristic common among traditionalist. So its obvious we're not your kind of people and you're not our kind of people. So what's your motivation in visiting this site? It appears to be to preach, not to share ideas. That's where your character comes into play. One last thing, the Quran IS a weapon. A weapon to fight falsehood. If you see any falsehood here, bring your proofs from the Quran.
like I said, my character always comes into play because of the truthful observations and statements I make. I am not a traditional. I am actually a realist. Therefore I look at PM and free-minds, from the most realistic view point. It have no consensus and provided no solutions. That is the reality.
So its obvious we're not your kind of people and you're not our kind of people.
This statement i resent because we are all believers. I sincerely hope we all get close to GOD in the end. i wish hell on no one.
So what's your motivation in visiting this site? It appears to be to preach, not to share ideas. That's where your character comes into play.
My motivation is to create awareness. I do not visit this site with the intentions of creating enemies. Honestly, I may disagree with Wakas, but for me to say anything about his character as evil or negative will be stupid. i know nothing about him. I speak about PM. I speak about the movement, not individuals. i dont know each person, but what happens is that I sometimes describe a hat that someone wears and they become offended (if you understand my analogy).
One last thing, the Quran IS a weapon. A weapon to fight falsehood. If you see any falsehood here, bring your proofs from the Quran.
True. no falsehood there is that statement if used in context. but like Wakas and OPF love to say, you cannot find in the koran where it explicitly state that "the koran is a weapon to fight falsehood." And for you to use that argument is not applying your extreme rule of "quran alone." but I digress. You Brian didn't use it previously to fight falsehood, but to attack me. And that is what I objected too. Look at your statement below
This guy satanhatesme obviously just doesn't get it. He thinks he's a defender of Islam but he's really just a defender and blindfollower of one of the many man-made psuedo-Islamic sects.
Then you quoted verse. Now where in that statement did you say anything about fighting "falsehood?"
-
SHM, a reminder
The majority of Progressive Muslim wishes to demolish Submission (Islam). This is not a claim but fact.
I replied "fact"? May I ask what dictionary you use? clearly implying that I thought what you said was not a fact. Then you try and twist out of this by replying with
It is not a fact that there is no consensus within Progressive Muslims? The major (especially those on this forum) simply wish to recreate Islam. Do you want to do a survey on this?
To which Zenje quite rightly asked "Having no consensus = to demolish Islam?"
To which you respond with
The opinions of PM demolished Islam. What is false about that statement? All the essence of Islam (shahada, salat, zakat, hajj, fasting, etc) PM seek to destory, too put to an end, to lay waste of Islam. What is wrong with that statement. Nothing.
There are many things wrong with it. Firstly, "the opinions of PM demolished Islam" is not correct, as far as I'm aware "Islam" is still alive and kicking. You then make another slanderous comment by listing things "PM seek to destroy". Who said that? Where on the site does it say that? Ironically, the owner of the site is an ardent supporter of IslamicReform.org thus clearly suggesting it is reform he seeks and not demolition.
Then when pressed further by Zenje to back up your claims, you state the following
Firstly, for me to find evidence in the KORAN that Progressive Muslin wishes to demolish Islam is a retard request.
No-one asked you to "find evidence in the KORAN" for what you said, i.e. "The majority of Progressive Muslim wishes to demolish Submission (Islam). This is not a claim but fact.". The request was simply to back it up with specifics, for example quote somewhere from the site which stated such, or quote at the very least several members of the forum stating as such. Quite simply since you could not provide evidence for your slander, you made up the request that we asked you to provide it from "the KORAN". Ironically, it is YOU yourself who made up the "retard request". So it is true to say you did not call Zenje a retard, you were referring to the request... and who made up this request?
Also, my assertions about PM has nothing to do with the Quran.
Yeah, we figured that part out.
And then the icing on the cake, proof you did not even understand my request
Wakas asked for facts about why Progressive Muslins are 'demolishing' Islam.
I did no such thing. Since you dont seem to understand, perhaps I can clarify with an example, the following two statements are not identical
"SHM wishes to demolish PM"
"why SHM is demolishing PM"
In any case, unevidenced accusations (i.e. slander) is not tolerated on the forum. You did this previously and if you cannot back it up, as stated in the forum rules, disciplinary action will result.
-
Brother SatanHatesMe,
This will be my final post on this topic. Yes, ProgressiveMuslims.org is an organization, but the users of this discussion forum (sometimes called progressive muslims, quranists, quran aloners, god aloners, but we're really just believers) are not necessarily a part of or members of ProgressiveMuslims.org. Many of us post on a variety of similar sites, some even host their own sites. This discussion forum is just one of many online places where we congregate to share, teach, interact, socialize and learn. We don't have concensus on all issues because we are searching for answers. Due to "Islam" being under the tight fisted control of traditionalists for 1000+ years, our attempt to understand the Quran without interpretations from others sources is an enormous task, which will take time.
We are individuals who believe the Qur'an is Divine Revelation, we believe the Qur'an by Itself shows The Way to the development of the ideal individual and society, but we do not see that reflected in the traditionalist interpretation and implementation. Our motivation is not to please or assuage the West. Many of us were born and/or live in the West. If our goal was to please the West, it would be much easier for us to become Christians and denounce the Quran. Instead, we invest our time and engery in better understanding it. We have not damaged Islam or Muslims in anyway, (except for maybe the egos of the imams, sheikhs, and mullahs), because we're just individuals sharing knowledge and ideas. Who has that hurt? You are in no way required to agree with any of us on any issue. In fact, you're welcome to disagree, but if you disagree, debate in a manner that is productive. State what you disagree with, why you disagree with it, provide evidence that supports your point of view, and don't come across arrogantly and immaturely. But, if your argument is that we need to follow traditional interpretation across the board, then your in the wrong place and your argument will not be well received. We enjoy using our God given ability to think and reason.
Peace
-
This will be my final post on this topic. Yes, ProgressiveMuslims.org is an organization, but the users of this discussion forum (sometimes called progressive muslims, quranists, quran aloners, god aloners, but we're really just believers) are not necessarily a part of or members of ProgressiveMuslims.org...
Again, a concept some find extremely difficult to comprehend. SHM may not be aware of this, but I'll try anyways - he is a part of free-minds/progressivemuslims.org D -
This will be my final post on this topic. Yes, ProgressiveMuslims.org is an organization, but the users of this discussion forum (sometimes called progressive muslims, quranists, quran aloners, god aloners, but we're really just believers) are not necessarily a part of or members of ProgressiveMuslims.org. Many of us post on a variety of similar sites, some even host their own sites. This discussion forum is just one of many online places where we congregate to share, teach, interact, socialize and learn.
Progressive Muslims are not limited to this site or other sites like progressivemuslims.org. It is a movement and organization. An organization is a group of persons organized for some end or work. The fact that you wish to reform Islam and share, teach, interact, socialize and learn towards that objective means you are a participant within the organization. Many who may not call themselves PM, they are apart of that movement and organization knowingly or unknowingly.
We don't have concensus on all issues because we are searching for answers. Due to "Islam" being under the tight fisted control of traditionalists for 1000+ years, our attempt to understand the Quran without interpretations from others sources is an enormous task, which will take time.
I agree. You dont have a consensus on many issues.
State what you disagree with, why you disagree with it, provide evidence that supports your point of view, and don't come across arrogantly and immaturely. But, if your argument is that we need to follow traditional interpretation across the board, then your in the wrong place and your argument will not be well received. We enjoy using our God given ability to think and reason.
My argument is your are not objective with you analyze. You are basically insisting to reject any thing vaguely considered "traditional" and such argument are greatly flaw. You no loner wish to be objective but biasly subjective in a desire to reject anything traditional. This limits your sources, evidence, and proof. Im not saying that everything mustbe viewed from a traditional view point. I AM NOT A TRADITIONALIST but a realist. Be objective.
-
Again, a concept some find extremely difficult to comprehend. SHM may not be aware of this, but I'll try anyways - he is a part of free-minds/progressivemuslims.org
Zenje, an organization is a group of persons organized for some end. PM using free-minds as their tool wishes to recreate, reform, and re-interpretate Islam. I dont do this therefore i am not a member of PM. The fact that you wish to participate towards that end means you are a participant within the organization.
Plus with all this anger toward my posting, I dont even think I am a welcome participant of even this free-minds forum sometimes
-
I did no such thing. Since you dont seem to understand, perhaps I can clarify with an example, the following two statements are not identical
"SHM wishes to demolish PM"
"why SHM is demolishing PM"
In any case, unevidenced accusations (i.e. slander) is not tolerated on the forum. You did this previously and if you cannot back it up, as stated in the forum rules, disciplinary action will result.Whoa! It like that Wakas?! I make truthful observations about PM having no consensus, about the arguement of PM is basically flaw within it self since, about they provide no solutions, about more confusion and division are within the organization. Now you threaten to ban me? And this is free-minds?!?!?
How much people have posted here without facts to supported there arguments? Yet my statements warrants a ban Wakas? A ban is clear evidence that Free-minds is not as ?free? as many in here will like to believe. Especially since the administrator and Moderate have the ability to "interpret" the rules as they please. So what that means, if some say something negative about PM that they dont like, he or she gets ban?
-
Peace SHM,
So what that means, if some say something negative about PM that they dont like, he or she gets ban?
No, not at all. The fact that you're criticisms are still here is evidence to the contrary. What disciplinary action is designed to prevent is folks citing criticisms over and over as FACT and providing no evidence to establish this.
Peace,
Tay -
No, not at all. The fact that you're criticisms are still here is evidence to the contrary. What disciplinary action is designed to prevent is folks citing criticisms over and over as FACT and providing no evidence to establish this.
Base on my understanding of the rules, especially rule #2, claims made about the scripture must be back up (there is even a section called 'Trash' where no claims are supported by facts). Although I did back up some of my claims about PM, there is no need to be ban for criticizing the performance of the organization. There is no need to ban me because I criticizes the unity of the organization. And these claims are support by the fact that PM have no consensus and provided no answers. I know it may hurt for some people, but its true. Progressive Muslims criticize "traditional muslims" and "submitters" all the times. I once request the moderators to change the blurb about 'submitters/code 19' on free-mind.org because it was very offensive (and they did). Yet when I criticize PM, disciplinary action must be taken?!?! Is that logical or even fair?
Man, to whoever reads this, look at me as an example, if you notice I stop posting here, it was forcibly (i was banned). Which is evidence of the greater picture i have been trying to argument since I return to post on this site.
-
Peace SHM,
Although I did back up some of my claims about PM, there is no need to be ban for criticizing the performance of the organization.
Once again, you're creating an argument that does not exist. NO ONE is talking about banning you for criticising the performance of the "organization". You're welcome to your opinions just as anyone else.
It's pretty simple, really. If you use the word "fact", then this "fact" should be supported by evidence. If it is supported by opinion, then it is not a fact. To continuously claim that statements are "facts" without any support, or with only the support of more opinion, is a violation of rule #2.
The goal of this forum, as stated on the home page, is the re-examination of islam through the qur'an-alone. If you're not interested in this path, then you are free to leave. If you are interested, then you are free to contribute. And constructive criticism is always welcome, the key word being "constructive".
No need for dramatics.
Peace,
Tay -
Once again, you're creating an argument that does not exist. NO ONE is talking about banning you for criticising the performance of the "organization". You're welcome to your opinions just as anyone else.
Surely doesnt seem so.
It's pretty simple, really. If you use the word "fact", then this "fact" should be supported by evidence. If it is supported by opinion, then it is not a fact. To continuously claim that statements are "facts" without any support, or with only the support of more opinion, is a violation of rule #2.
This is so crazy. Am I the only one here who is being targeted because vocabulary?!?! Are you serious? I stated progressive muslin have not consensus. Is it not a fact base on the division and confusion within the organization on the base essence of practices including salat, zakat, hajj etc? I stated the PM wishes to demolish Islam. Is it not a fact base on there agenda to re-interpret many essential essence of Islam like salat, zakat, hajj etc. And I explain why there is a different between innovating and demolish and why the word best suits there intention since it subjective done.
If you are interested, then you are free to contribute. And constructive criticism is always welcome, the key word being "constructive".
No need for dramatics.No dramatics. I gave constructive criticism. It was the articles i request to be posted. i examine why you have no consensus and the root cause. But instead on constructive criticizing my draft article, some attack. Then I was threaten to be ban. Then scolded by you on the proper use of the word "fact." yet I am creating "dramatics". )
-
Zenje, an organization is a group of persons organized for some end. PM using free-minds as their tool wishes to recreate, reform, and re-interpretate Islam.
Yet this is the same person who is up in arms about there being no consensus among pm.org
I stated the PM wishes to demolish Islam. Is it not a fact base on there agenda to re-interpret many essential essence of Islam like salat, zakat, hajj etc. And I explain why there is a different between innovating and demolish and why the word best suits there intention since it subjective done.
So you've taken it upon yourself to decide that you're right and anyone else who wishes to question, or understand those words in a different light (other than yours) is not only wrong, but wishes to demolish Islam. -
Peace SHM,
Surely doesnt seem so.
Yet somehow, your words still appear on the screen confused
Am I the only one here who is being targeted because vocabulary?!?! Are you serious?
No, and yes.
I stated progressive muslin have not consensus.
Yes, about 45 times. No one seems to disagree with you. Perhaps "consensus" isn't part of the goal of this website??
I stated the PM wishes to demolish Islam. Is it not a fact base on there agenda to re-interpret many essential essence of Islam like salat, zakat, hajj etc.
No, it is not a fact. It is your opinion that islam is such a fragile establishment that people questioning the validity of it's current practices would render it "demolished".
No dramatics. I gave constructive criticism.
You gave dramatics. Here they are
to whoever reads this, look at me as an example, if you notice I stop posting here, it was forcibly (i was banned). Which is evidence of the greater picture i have been trying to argument since I return to post on this site.But instead on constructive criticizing my draft article, some attack. Then I was threaten to be ban. Then scolded by you on the proper use of the word "fact."
Most articles posted are either attacked or praised, as can be seen in this very thread. The threat to disciplinary action was because of a lack of evidence to substantiate claims cited as facts (rule #2). Proper usage of words, such as "fact" are essential to the integrity and progress of any discourse. Otherwise you'd have people blathering about supposed facts that have absolutely zero meaning. Things can quickly digress from that point.
I'm not sure why this is such a difficult concept to grasp.
Fact <---requires evidence
Opinion <---does not require evidencePeace,
Tay -
Yet this is the same person who is up in arms about there being no consensus among pm.org
if you think the goal of an org constitute a consensus, you are confuse.
