WikiIslam:Discussions/Visitor Inquiries: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

WikiIslam:Discussions/Visitor Inquiries (view source)

Revision as of 18:20, 20 January 2021

34,801 bytes removed ,  20 January 2021
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 53: Line 53:


:Thanks for the offer! Much appreciated. I'm not aware of anything at the moment, but will let you know. There's always something on the [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Tasks tasks page] if you find yourself at a loss for something to do (but note that some of the tasks may be out of date, so it would be best to check with us first). --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 05:27, 1 August 2012 (PDT)
:Thanks for the offer! Much appreciated. I'm not aware of anything at the moment, but will let you know. There's always something on the [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Tasks tasks page] if you find yourself at a loss for something to do (but note that some of the tasks may be out of date, so it would be best to check with us first). --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 05:27, 1 August 2012 (PDT)
==It is possible to have sex with a death woman in Islam.==
I just red on line what  Saturday, 28 April 2012 the Al Arabia News wrote ( a newspaper owned by the Saudi king).
Egypt's women urge MPs not to pass early marriage, and sex-after-death laws. If they pass the law, it will allow men to have sex with their own wife up to 6 hours after her death. The women are anyway just object there, that law would show even more how disturbed their mind is. Please people give some good idea where can I make people aware about this disgusting thing in the media. I don't see any problem if this will bring more tension  between Muslims and non Muslims if that is a fact.<small>&mdash;The preceding [[WikiIslam:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Szultan44|Szultan44]] ([[User talk:Szultan44|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Szultan44|contribs]]) {{#if:10:54, 11 August 2012|&#32;on 10:54, 11 August 2012|}} </small>
:Hi Szultan44. Such questions are better suited to the [http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/ FFI forum]. Open a thread under the [http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewforum.php?f=22&sid=d49039027d61629d68981293d3281497 Islam: Questioned, Defended, & Explained] or [http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewforum.php?f=21&sid=d49039027d61629d68981293d3281497 The Quran and Hadith] sub forums, and you should receive an answer. --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 13:35, 11 August 2012 (PDT)
==My article still under construction==
My article http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Refuting_Apologists_Jews_Christians_and_Sabiens_can_go_to_heaven still have under construction template. Why ? <small>&mdash;The preceding [[WikiIslam:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Azdahaexm|Azdahaexm]] ([[User talk:Azdahaexm|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Azdahaexm|contribs]]) {{#if:05:00, 3 September 2012|&#32;on 05:00, 3 September 2012|}} </small>
:Hi Azdahaexm. It's not ready. I haven't got around to fixing the formatting etc., yet. I'm snowed-under trying to keep the other pages up-to-date. There are also a few points I would like to add to the article. I'm sorry that it's not on our new articles list yet, but the important thing is that it's here and should eventually be added. I hope you don't mind the delay too much. --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 07:09, 3 September 2012 (PDT)
::Thanks friend. No I didn't mind at all. Infact I have done some more changes. thanks --[[User:Azdahaexm|Azdahaexm]] ([[User talk:Azdahaexm|talk]]) 11:05, 4 September 2012 (PDT)
:::Hi Azdahaexm. The article has now been added. --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 04:46, 11 September 2012 (PDT)
::::Thank you so much
==Underline in editor==
I couldn't find "underline" option in Editor. Is is possible to add that ? --[[User:Azdahaexm|Azdahaexm]] ([[User talk:Azdahaexm|talk]]) 11:46, 4 September 2012 (PDT)
:I'm sure Axius could add that if need be, but (with the exception of our very own Prophet [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Farsideology Farside]) we don't really use underline in articles. We usually stick with using bold within quotes or otherwise italics for emphasis. --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 12:57, 4 September 2012 (PDT)
::LOL@Prophet Farside... I also sometimes need underline . Sometimes I have to bold the complete statement but to give more emphasize on certain words in the whole statement so I use underline for that. --[[User:Azdahaexm|Azdahaexm]] ([[User talk:Azdahaexm|talk]]) 13:30, 4 September 2012 (PDT)
:::Oh, cool. You could try adding italics to the bolded text like this:
:::{{Quote|{{Bukhari|9|92|399}}| Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah's Apostle said, "People will not stop asking questions till they say, 'This is Allah, the Creator of everything, '''then ''who'' created Allah?''' "}}
:::How's that? --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 13:41, 4 September 2012 (PDT)
::::Thanks, yes i already did that , if you  read my article, in commentary of "Biyanul Quran" I have italicized some words in the beginning. But I think underline will be better. :)
:::::Sorry. I hate saying no but I'll have to here. :( It's to keep our pages consistent in style and content (I think the underlining of text was seen as being messy and hard on the eyes). WikiIslam hasn't used underline in it's pages since 2006 (long before I ever made my first edit or even heard of the site). --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 02:13, 5 September 2012 (PDT)
::::::I was about to say the same that if it goes against the standard or looks messy then there is no need to add it. - {{unsigned|Azdahaexm}}
:::::::Wikipedia has an Underline template [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Underline], which interestingly is not used much [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&limit=500&target=Template%3AUnderline&namespace=0]. On their manual of style it [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting#How_not_to_apply_emphasis says] ''"Underlining is used in typewriting and handwriting to represent italic type. Generally, do not underline text or it may be confused with links on a web page."'' (the links issue is also what I agree with too), so yes we're OK as we are without it. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 17:12, 5 September 2012 (PDT)
==Appropriate to refute Quranists ?==
As we all know there is an emerging sect that claim to follow ONLY QURAN [Quranists]. Although there are many many refutations to Quranists for their claim that hadiths are not part of Islam or Quran was the only revelation but one of the most well documented and precise is at www.call-to-monotheism.com [islamic apologetic website]. Is it appropriate to create pages using this work to refute claims of Quranists ? I mean such kind of articles are appropriate for wikiislam ? --[[User:Azdahaexm|Azdahaexm]] ([[User talk:Azdahaexm|talk]]) 00:56, 8 September 2012 (PDT)
:We focus on mainstream Islamic beliefs but we do have one page dealing with Qur'anists [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an_Only_Islam_-_Why_it_is_Not_Possible here]. I guess you could expand the information on that page, but I don't see the need for more pages on the same thing. We also have to be careful that we do not plagiarize other's work. Taking ideas from them is fine but it cant be the same. Funny thing about Qur'anists is that I was a Muslim most of my life and have never met one. You cant escape their babble on the internet but they hardly seem to exist in the real world. One of life's great mysteries.:)
:On another note, I wanted to ask you is there a reason you use the Sahih International translation? We like to use either Yusuf Ali's, Marmaduke Pickthal's or M. H. Shakir's translations from the [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Compendium_of_Muslim_Texts Compendium of Muslim Texts]. Would it be okay for me to change the Qur'an translations on the article to one of these? --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 03:49, 8 September 2012 (PDT)
::Hahaha, you are right, but i have two of my cousins who are quranists, anyways , i will see what i can add to the page you have posted. About translation , there is no special reason to use Sahih International's quran except it is easily accessible via links like http://quran.com/1/1 and it is very close to the word to word provided by [http://corpus.quran.com Corpus Quran]. Feel free to change translations, I will keep this in mind and will use the above mentioned translations in future and I will change translations for my current article. Thanks --[[User:Azdahaexm|Azdahaexm]] ([[User talk:Azdahaexm|talk]]) 10:40, 8 September 2012 (PDT)
==Muhammad and his Wives==
I think this article is probably ready to go live.
There are still a couple of references missing, but I think we have reached the stage where it is not worth delaying publication over them. I will add those references as I locate them.
I may also want to add a couple of small details in the future, but they will not change any major argument or even the flow of a paragraph. They are just details that add life to the character portrayals, but so far I have only read them in secondary (or tertiary or quaternary...) sources.
I suspect my page on Khadija can now replace the existing page on Khadija, and my introductory page, which includes a link to a list of Muhammad's unconsummated marriages, can replace the existing "List of Muhammad's Wives and Concubines".
My pages on Safiya and Mariya should not replace the existing pages, as the latter are analytical articles, whereas my pages are biographies. However, I have added links for further reading.[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 21:23, 20 October 2012 (PDT)
:Great. As I mentioned previously, Axius will have to read through it before adding it. He's going to be busy for the next week or so and won't be logging in very often, so it will probably be after that. If it was a normal article, I could have done it but this is a massive addition. --[[User:Admin3|Admin3]] ([[User talk:Admin3|talk]]) 02:55, 21 October 2012 (PDT)
==New Editor==
Hi,
I'm a new editor, I wish to contribute my articles on Islamic miracle claims to this site. How do I get about doing this?
[[User:Nahar Varma|Nahar Varma]] ([[User talk:Nahar Varma|talk]]) 04:15, 10 December 2012 (PST)
:Welcome to WikiIslam! Nice to have you here. If you want to work on an article from scratch, you can click this link: [[User:Nahar Varma/Sandbox]]. If you have an article already written, you can go to [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Help:Contents#How_to_Create_a_New_Page this page] and enter the desired page title into the box, then press the "Create page" button. Be sure to add this template to the top of the page while it is formatted etc: <nowiki>{{Underconstruction}}</nowiki>. I will leave our welcome template on your user-talk page because it contains a lot of useful links to help you get the hang of wiki editing, but feel free to ask for additional assistance when needed.--[[User:Sahabah|Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 04:29, 10 December 2012 (PST)
::hi Nahar, good to see you here. I'm the person who responded to your email. Nahar had sent the following email ([http://www.debunkingbucailleism.blogspot.com blog]):
{{Quote||Hello,
I am interested in studying different religions, although personally I'm not religious; I am a Deist.
I came across scientific miracle claims in the Qur'an in early 2011. I soon came across your website,
and inspired by it, I have started my own blog refuting the claims of Islamic Bucailleists: www.debunkingbucailleism.blogspot.com
The articles refuting miracle claims are very good, but there are too few of them, hence I'd like to contribute.
Sincerely,
Nahar Varma}}
::Nahar, today I'll go over your site and then comment here.--[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 05:25, 10 December 2012 (PST)
:::Ok, Nahar, I guess you will have to go over [[Islam and Science]] yourself and see if your arguments are already present there or in one of the sub-articles. You would start from your first article (written in September, when you started the blog). I liked what you had in this post [http://www.debunkingbucailleism.blogspot.com/2012/09/three-criteria-for-scientific.html Three Criteria for Scientific Foreknowledge]. I see some of that has been covered in our Islam and Science introduction (we have 4 points and you have 3).
:::My suggestion: The steps for you would be to go over what we have on our site and get an idea of the types of pages we have and then go to your blog one by one and see where you can add your content. We may not have some topics that you have. Then for example after checking the articles for September, you see that some stuff should be added on our site, let us know what you think you should do. The language should of course be changed to 3rd person. Sorry I could not give a detailed/helpful analysis of what should be done but I'm pressed for time. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 21:04, 11 December 2012 (PST)
==Criticisms of other religions Wiki==
Does your group or any group that you know of plan or have a Wiki devoted to criticisms of each major religion in the world?
[[Special:Contributions/97.85.168.22|97.85.168.22]] 17:49, 25 April 2013 (PDT)
:No we don't. The closest I can think of is [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page rational wiki] (See [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Category:Religion Category:Religion]) but their focus is wide and not specifically on religion. I dont know of any other wikis that criticize other religions. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 17:55, 25 April 2013 (PDT)
While "WikiIslam is a community edited website which focuses on the critique of Islam" and while this site claims that most editors are truly atheists and agnosts and policies and content of this site reflect that "editors are advised that no region should be given priority over another", I suggest too: Would be a huge evidence of that to have critique of Islam by its similarities to Judaism and Christianity. Otherwise critique to Islam may fail, to collapse only into contradictory and hypocrisy. I suggest that this site includes on main page a region of that area and there articles of similarities of one god, attitude to women, attitude to gays, jesus as prophet of both, attitudes towards other religions and religious free people. There is in bible too marriage of Abraham with his half-sister or niece Sarah, father having sex ang gettin children with his daughters (Lot with his daughters in Genesis 19:33) and it is not condemned in bible - moreover there are over 10 stories of incestuous relationships in the bible. A critique that Islam is just one version of Abrahamic religions and very similar, would be very informative addition to this site. This site should make more clear statement on the main page, whether this site is objectively or subjectively critiq to islam. Is this site critiqs from other religion beliefs or from free of religions people to islam? Personally I think that religious people that criticize other religions of same things that their own religion does, are deep in un-credibility. --[[User:Oneofusall|Oneofusall]] ([[User talk:Oneofusall|talk]]) 05:39, 6 July 2015 (PDT)
:We stay away from criticizing (or praising in any way) other religions because we would not want to alienate various segments of the site visitors. Islam has a lot of issues on its own and people are free to investigate other religions from other sources. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 19:10, 8 July 2015 (PDT)


==help needed to build new article==
==help needed to build new article==
Line 188: Line 88:


:If you look at the talk page for Wikipedia's Alhazen article[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alhazen#Misuse_of_sources], you'll see a lot of the claims are disputed because [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam,_Science_and_the_Problems_at_Wikipedia Jagged 85] was a big contributor of the information there. We have our hub page concerning the "[http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Golden_Age Golden Age]", but other than that, we would suggest going to the [http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/ FFI forum] if you have any questions. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 11:04, 5 July 2013 (PDT)
:If you look at the talk page for Wikipedia's Alhazen article[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alhazen#Misuse_of_sources], you'll see a lot of the claims are disputed because [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam,_Science_and_the_Problems_at_Wikipedia Jagged 85] was a big contributor of the information there. We have our hub page concerning the "[http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Golden_Age Golden Age]", but other than that, we would suggest going to the [http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/ FFI forum] if you have any questions. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 11:04, 5 July 2013 (PDT)
==Concerned about Security, IP Address Tracing etc.==
I'm becoming increasingly active in restoring the historical truth to various Wikipedia pages which were hijacked by Islamists. I am concerned as to whether it would be possible for someone to trace my IP address or my computer, and harm me. Are either of these a valid concern? If so I suppose I can be entirely safe by making my Wikipedia edits from a library or other public computer and public internet connection? {{unsigned|‎Devraj}}
:Its safe to get a username and edit from the username (just make sure you're logged in all the time) from any computer (home or elsewhere). Good luck. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 15:06, 19 July 2013 (PDT)
Please check out this article[http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/andrewkantor/2004-06-17-kantor_x.htm] - one among many - that indicates that it is quite possible for someone with ill intent to track the source of online activity. Why should I not be concerned about this?
:That is basically an alarmist article. There's about 30-50K active editors on Wikipedia (more than 5 edits in the last 30 days) at any given time. Unless there's illegal activity (real threats of violence for example) there's no tracking and even then only authorities can access that tracking information. Wikipedia admins do have access (I think) if they have the checkuser right but its a small number of admins who do and they dont misuse that data. If you still have questions you can ask on Wikipedia or another internet forum. There are many editors editing Wikipedia with the alternate point of view about Islam, Unless an editor does something really illegal (terrorist threat or something) their identity is not and cannot be known. Again make sure you're logged on (important, otherwise your IP address will be recorded in that page's history). IP addresses can be known to admins but to trace that address to a real person requires a police permit and so on, which is only given if its an extreme case (e.g. violence, as I mentioned). To be safe, always do a "preview" on an edit before you submit it, to make sure your login is still active (sometimes the login goes inactive if the edit window was open for a long time). If you stay logged in, dont do anything illegal you'll be safe. Maybe [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&limit=500&hideliu=1 this] link might help - lots of people editing with IPs without any care, however again if you are concerned, you can make sure you are logged in and it will not be public. Once again, you should visit internet IT forums or ask Wikipedia for assistance for further clarifying these things. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 17:05, 19 July 2013 (PDT)
Thank you! That helps.
==Indian female convert to Islam killed by Taliban (Islam in the news)==
Hi. I wanted to share the news of the recent killing of an Indian social worker Sushmita Banerjee (later Syeda Kamal) by the Taliban. She had married an Afghan in the 80's. When she went to Afghanistan, she found out that he was already married. Then after facing oppression under the Taliban there, she fled but her in-laws recaptured her. She decided to do social work in Afghanistan but was recently executed by the Taliban who said "why did you write nasty things about us?"
Is there a way I contribue to the "Islam in the news" section?--[[User:Mahomet|Mahomet]] ([[User talk:Mahomet|talk]]) 22:45, 8 September 2013 (PDT)
<ref>{{cite news |url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-09-06/india/41832545_1_suspected-taliban-militants-afghan-police-afghanistan |title=Indian author Sushmita Banerjee killed in Afghanistan by Taliban  |date=September 6, 2013 |newspaper=Times of India}}</ref>
<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/05/sushmita-banerjee-killed-taliban_n_3874734.html |title= Sushmita Banerjee, Female Indian Author, Killed By Taliban |newspaper=Huffington Post}}</ref>
<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/why-did-you-write-nasty-things-taliban-militants-reportedly-asked-sushmita-banerjee-before-killing-h-415758 |title=Why did you write nasty things, Taliban militants reportedly asked Sushmita Banerjee before killing her |date=September 07, 2013}}</ref>
{{reflist}}
:If you look at the contribs for [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Special:Contributions/Al-Qaum Al-Qaum], you can see stuff is added first to the [[Islam in the News]] page and then to the [[WikiIslam:Latest News]]. Please follow the formats (small amount of text from the news site, link formats, heading should reflect the news source etc). --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 10:10, 9 September 2013 (PDT)
::It's already been added to ''Islam in the News'' by Al-Qaum. See [[Islam in the News#Afghanistan: Militants shoot dead the Indian author of a popular book about her escape from the Taliban|here]]. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 12:27, 9 September 2013 (PDT)
:::Ohh, great! You guys are really international and stay on top of things. :) --[[User:Mahomet|Mahomet]] ([[User talk:Mahomet|talk]]) 20:32, 12 September 2013 (PDT)
::::Thanks Mahomet! [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 23:16, 12 September 2013 (PDT)
==Add option to "submit your testimony"?==
I would like to submit my testimony to this page http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Special:Form/newapostate
Under "current worldview", can you add the option of Bahá’í?<small>&mdash;Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:Golconda|Golconda]] ([[User talk:Golconda|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Golconda|contribs]]) {{#if:19:57, 16 March 2014 |&#32; 19:57, 16 March 2014 |}} ([[WikiIslam:Signatures#Signing_Posts|Remember to sign your comments]]) </small>
:Hi Golconda. Just submit your testimony and we'll add that for you. [[User:Sahab|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab|talk]]) 20:07, 16 March 2014 (PDT)
==The Islamic Golden Age referenced on the Wikipedia article on "humans"==
Without any citations, the "Islamic Golden Age" myth was added to other contributions during the Middle Ages.
"The late Middle Ages saw the rise of revolutionary ideas and technologies. In China, an advanced and urbanized society promoted innovations and sciences, such as printing and seed drilling. In India, major advancements were made in mathematics, philosophy, religion and metallurgy. The Islamic Golden Age saw major advancements in mathematics, astronomy, optics, biology, medicine, art and architecture in Muslim empires."
Whatever "Muslim advances" (should say Persian advances!) there were was from conquering places. This appears to represent something debunked in the 1001 inventions page. Basically, they list more advances for Muslims than for China... what a joke.
Maybe add a "citation needed" and delete most of the tags.
Muslims contributed to basically nothing except some math and astronomy.
What disgusts me is that it calls those inventions "Muslim" but later talks about globalization and the information age as if it weren't "Western".
Care to fix this with me? [[Special:Contributions/50.187.216.93|50.187.216.93]] 23:05, 16 June 2014 (PDT)
:I personally don't have enough time to do anything on Wikipedia (too much to do and its hard to maintain it with them contantly fighting to keep away anything truthful about Islam) but someone else might. This certain article [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age] doesnt look too long so it shouldnt be too hard to fix. I would suggest add the citation needed tag where you want to and wait a week before you remove those statements with a comment "removing unsourced statements. Had previously left in the Citation needed tag. Use talk page before restoring any statements". Relevant to this might be this article on our site [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_Science_and_the_Problems_at_Wikipedia]. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 01:20, 17 June 2014 (PDT)
::Great Idea. I'll go for it. [[Special:Contributions/50.187.216.93|50.187.216.93]] 12:37, 19 June 2014 (PDT)
:::I didnt look at it in detail but I think in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Islamic_Golden_Age&diff=prev&oldid=613602760 this] edit over there, you will most likely have to defend removal of references / referenced information.
:::Its very difficult to clean up the mess created by the Muslim editor Jagged85 (he had 60K or 80K edits, most of which were intentionally misleading as their [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_Science_and_the_Problems_at_Wikipedia investigation] showed). What you may be seeing or dealing with may be some of his work. The references will have to be checked. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 19:14, 19 June 2014 (PDT)
==Purpose of this website==
I am personally a Christian, but I have some sympathy for Islam, as I have many Muslim friends who have been quite helpful to me over the years.  I have shown them respect, and they have reciprocated. I do not pretend to know what is best for others, any more than I enjoy others pretending to know what is best for myself.  I was wondering, is this site meant to ultimately be purely scientific, letting the facts fall where they may, or is it meant to be biased against Islam, preferring to portray views that denigrate Islam whenever possible or convenient?  Thanks, [[User:Scottperry|Scottperry]] ([[User talk:Scottperry|talk]]) 12:55, 23 June 2014 (PDT)
:There's a verse in the Quran, 5:38 that says a thief's hands should be cut off. Islam cannot be reformed. If one verse is to be rejected then the whole Quran can be rejected.
:This site focuses on criticism of Islam. You can have a good look around first. Start from the [[site map]].
:Being biased against Islam is not a bad thing or something to be ashamed of because Islam itself is biased against non-Muslims like me and you since it says we will all burn in Hell for not accepting it (Quran 48:13). Your Muslim friends may be nice people but if they think a thief's hands should not be cut off (Quran 5:38), if they think a wife should not be beaten for disobedience (Quran 4:34), if they dont believe that virgins in Heaven are large breasted (Quran 78:33) then they are not really Muslims and are not believing in actual Quranic verses. They are choosing to reject those verses or defend them in some way.
:But do tell us what can be done differently or if you have any suggestions. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 15:20, 23 June 2014 (PDT)
::Thanks for your frankness.  I think I'll try to insert the full edit, along with cites, that I first started to work on, and see what happens.  Regarding hand-chopping, there are verses in the Bible that say homosexuals, disobedient sons, and adulterers should all be killed, and Jesus supposedly said that not a "jot" of the Bible should be disregarded, but just the same, modern-day Christianity ''has'' opted to reject those verses, yet to keep others, and still  continues to be a major influence in the world.  Christianity has adapted significantly over the centuries, and much of it for the better.  It's had a 700 year head-start over Islam.  There are also verses in the Quran that say that there is hope for non-Muslims to enter heaven.  As with the Bible, both books are filled with contradictions.  Personally, as a Christian, I pick and choose which parts resonate with me, and which don't.  I think that whether or not most other Christians would admit it, they all do that too.  How many Christians do you know these days that stone all of those "evil-doers" as mentioned above?
::At any rate, I don't know if I'll be a very good "fit" here, but I'll try a few edits and see what happens.  My "debt" to Islam, as a Christian, is that no less than twice, my life was literally saved by Muslims!  Don't ask me why, I couldn't say.  So long as you guys are fundamentally honest about your criticisms against Islam here, which we shall see, I shall be happy to contribute here.  Thanks, [[User:Scottperry|Scottperry]] ([[User talk:Scottperry|talk]]) 19:32, 23 June 2014 (PDT)
:::Ok. Well that is all good stuff for debate.
:::So for your edit [http://wikiislam.net/w/index.php?title=Muslim_Statistics&diff=107924&oldid=101364] you would first add it on the Education page (possibly Worldwide section here [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Education_and_Employment#Worldwide]) and after that the main Statistics edit that you made can be restored. Stuff on that page is mentioned and sourced in the sub-pages. You'll notice though that all the stuff in these Stats pages is quotes -- and I think thats a problem (for this reason I think the addition will be a challenge). But as long as what you put in cannot be disputed or challenged it could be fine so the more sources you can add the better. Yea try it and we'll see how it looks. In this case case you would need to provide proof that these named countries were really under the influence of soviet communism as Muslims would challenge that and say "those countries did it on their own". This is the kind of sourcing we use and its important as you can see. Another to thing to check is how "far" other Muslim countries  are from the high literacy rates (the ones that were not influenced by soviet communism). --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 20:04, 23 June 2014 (PDT)
::::Another opinion, of course there are good Muslims but in how is it because of Islam and how does that help Islam? They are just good as humans. All Muslims need not be hateful or believing in each and every verse of the Quran but their uproach is still cultist. They will keep considering Islam as superior and us as trasshy. Ask your Muslim friends to prove our site (or other sites) wrong. [[User:Saggy|Saggy]] ([[User talk:Saggy|talk]]) 07:04, 24 June 2014 (PDT)
:::::At Scottperry: Actually, the reason why Christians do not stone people is because Jesus stopped an adulteress from being stoned by saying "let he who has not sinned cast the first stone." And as for the "not a "jot" of the Bible should be disregarded", you ignore the bit straight after that sentence where he says "until everything is accomplished" (when he dies, he then says "It is finished"). For a "Christian" you sure do talk about/understand Christianity like a Muslim apologist would. These are exactly the same talking points they try to use as [[Tu Quoque]] arguments to shut down criticism. Unfortunately for them, and for you, a simple reading of the text shows your error. This is also where Christianity and Islam differ. Sure, Christian beliefs have changed with the times, but that did ''not'' take place by (as you suggest) Christians waking up one day and saying, "I don't like this part of the Bible, let's ignore it." It happened through the ability of reformers to successfully argue a theologically sound case for why Christians should stop certain things. Muslim reformers however do not have a leg to stand on. All the theologically sound arguments come from the terrorists. Let me quote this:
:::::"'''Chronological Shift in Violence'''
:::::''This is one of the most important factors to take into consideration. If you are going to criticize a holy book for what you believe it advocates to its followers, then you must read the text like a believer would. If a book contains a large amount of violence in it but finishes by telling its readers in the second half of the book to be pacifists and behave like cute little bunny rabbits, does it advocate violence or pacifism? Of course, the answer is that it advocates pacifism. Likewise if a book begins by describing pacifism but finishes by telling its readers to "slay the unbelievers wherever you find them", that book logically advocates violence.''
:::::''All of the "positive" violence committed in the Bible is found in the Old Testament. The New Testament contains absolutely no exhortations to violence. Quite the opposite, Jesus advocates extreme pacifism. Christians believe they are a part of the "New Covenant" described in the New Testament , not the Old Covenant described in the Old Testament.''
:::::''Muslims do not have an "old" or "new" covenant to filter their text through. However, what they do have is something very similar, it is the doctrine of Abrogation, where later Qur'anic verse naturally supersede earlier ones. This would be fine if like the Bible all the violence was confined to the beginning, but this is not the case. Don't take my word for it. Read the Qur'an in chronological order and the shift from pacifism to violence is unmissable. This results in rendering almost all of the peaceful verses abrogated and useless.''" [http://islamo-criticism.blogspot.com/2012/03/is-bible-more-bloodthirsty-than-quran.html (Link)]
:::::Concerning your "Christianity has had a 700 year head-start over Islam" logic, that is a ridiculous way of thinking. Sikhism is only about five hundred years old, so according to your logic, today they should be behaving like European Neanderthals from the early middle-ages. In addition to that, according to your logic, we should be apologizing for these hypothetical Neanderthals and making excuses for them. The evolution of religious believers does not happen like that. Religions generally conform in some degree to the more liberal morals of their times. The fact that the 700 years newer religion of Islam made a regression in morals when compared to Christianity should be all you need to know of its founder and the general spirit of its texts. Interestingly, the Baha'i Faith is a 19th century offshoot of Islam. Since Islam has had 1,000+ years head-start, shouldn't Baha'is be going around invading other countries in order to spread their newer religion, subjugating its people and destroying religious institutions belong to its previous occupants? That isn't happening, but guess what? There is a religion at this very moment cleansing the remaining religious minorities wherever it is dominant, and it ain't the Baha'is or Christians. And about those "verses in the Quran that say that there is hope for non-Muslims to enter heaven," that's total apologetic nonsense. Read this:
:::::"''There are many verses in the Qur'an that label Christians and Jews as disbelievers, and numerous more that explicitly condemn them and other disbelievers to Hell. There is scholarly consensus on the fact that Christians and Jews are viewed by Islam as kafirs, because of "the clear nature of the texts about this".''
:::::''If you read verse 2:62 in context, it is referring only to those Christians, Jews, and Sabiens who believed in the time of their own Prophet/Messenger.''
:::::''Each Revelation abrogated the previous. Thus, after the advent of Prophet Muhammad and Islam, no individual can make it into Paradise unless they accept Allah as God, Muhammad as his last Prophet and the Qur'an as Allah's final book of guidance.''
:::::''Therefore, the concept of Heavenly rewards in Islam are now exclusively offered to Muslims. Christians and Jews may believe in a single monotheistic god, but they do not believe in "His Messenger". Thus they are destined for the "burning fire".''
:::::''Additionally, the non-Muslims who do make it into Paradise will only be used as sex-slaves by believing men, Muslims who themselves will be spared hell-fire by Allah on the Day of Resurrection by making innocent Christians and Jews take their place and be thrown into Hell.''" [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Christians_Jews_and_Muslims_in_Heaven (Link)] [[User:Sahab|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab|talk]]) 15:02, 8 August 2014 (PDT)


==Inspired by Muhammad: Dog Hadiths==
==Inspired by Muhammad: Dog Hadiths==
IbnPinker
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
6,632

edits

Retrieved from "http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/127571"

Navigation menu