A redefinition of the Qur'an

[Genesis]

I been watching a few documentaries and what not, not necessarily on Islam, but just general conflicts within the ME.

Let's not talk about the political aspect of it, just the religious aspect, is there anyone for any religious reason against this?

Why not get a few thousand Imans and just reread and redefine and readdress what Islam means to people?


The Christians did this with ecumenical councils, and China unified Confucianism as the leading "religion" with the Wu emperor of Han when he himself a disciple of Confucianism changed from the previous "religion" and established 2 thousand years of Confucianism within China.


Now I don't want to sound insensitive to anyone, and I'm not blind to the fact the religious factors are a issue, but not the whole issue in terms of conflicts, regardless of religion people are going to have conflicts, but eliminating a factor is still a good call.

I'm not making a thread on Christianity because its importance has more or less faded, so protestants, Catholics, doesn't matter, while china just isn't religious at all.

 

[KingMamba]

I been watching a few documentaries and what not, not necessarily on Islam, but just general conflicts within the ME.
Let's not talk about the political aspect of it, just the religious aspect, is there anyone for any religious reason against this?

Why not get a few thousand Imans and just reread and redefine and readdress what Islam means to people?


The Christians did this with ecumenical councils, and China unified Confucianism as the leading "religion" with the Wu emperor of Han when he himself a disciple of Confucianism changed from the previous "religion" and established 2 thousand years of Confucianism within China.


Now I don't want to sound insensitive to anyone, and I'm not blind to the fact the religious factors are a issue, but not the whole issue in terms of conflicts, regardless of religion people are going to have conflicts, but eliminating a factor is still a good call.

I'm not making a thread on Christianity because its importance has more or less faded, so protestants, Catholics, doesn't matter, while china just isn't religious at all.

Quran is already defined differently by different schools, besides even if Imams got together and decided on one definition the extremists would not accept it because they do not consider our Imams as Muslims anyway. According to extremists all other Muslims are Mushriqs (hypocrites/ apostates) and wajibul qatl (worthy of death). So what we really need is a mass slaughter of these pigs not a tea party LOL.

 

[darkinsky]

and i take you as an authority on Quran and Islam

 

[Falcon29]

Religion has nothing to do with conflict in the Middle East, the security of Israel has been the reason for much internal conflict and political divisions. If there was stability in the Middle East that would mean one thing:

All Arab nations would direct attention at the Palestinian cause and dedicate lots of their resources and efforts towards it. This would mean Israel would have to end it's occupation or face social, political and economic warfare at the very least.

Israel knows this would bring the greatest challenge to their pariah state. Therefore conflicts must be generated to keep the region preoccupied in their own affairs and be dependent on foreign aid/loans and be on the brink of collapse.

This is why the Middle East is as it is today. Not because of religion, Islam is a perfect religion, the masons in this world and globalists want to get religion completely out of the picture. All that's left is Islam. So OP, don't make threads like this again.

End of discussion.

 

[Genesis]

Quran is already defined differently by different schools, besides even if Imams got together and decided on one definition the extremists would not accept it because they do not consider our Imams as Muslims anyway. According to extremists all other Muslims are Mushriqs (hypocrites/ apostates) and wajibul qatl (worthy of death). So what we really need is a mass slaughter of these pigs not a tea party LOL.

I thought about that, but you can't let a few people ruin it. The extremist have their thinking and not necessarily based on anything. They are against everything, even if you change to them, they would still find something else.

But this move may make the moderates a little more moderate. At least eliminate certain differences for some people and eliminate it more and more for younger generations.

@darkinsky

I don't have to be, I never gave a direction, or what not on Islam, but unity for the people is a goal, every nation and people has been striving.

 

[HRK]

I been watching a few documentaries and what not, not necessarily on Islam, but just general conflicts within the ME.
Let's not talk about the political aspect of it, just the religious aspect, is there anyone for any religious reason against this?

Why not get a few thousand Imans and just reread and redefine and readdress what Islam means to people?


The Christians did this with ecumenical councils, and China unified Confucianism as the leading "religion" with the Wu emperor of Han when he himself a disciple of Confucianism changed from the previous "religion" and established 2 thousand years of Confucianism within China.


Now I don't want to sound insensitive to anyone, and I'm not blind to the fact the religious factors are a issue, but not the whole issue in terms of conflicts, regardless of religion people are going to have conflicts, but eliminating a factor is still a good call.

I'm not making a thread on Christianity because its importance has more or less faded, so protestants, Catholics, doesn't matter, while china just isn't religious at all.

dear plz spare those topics, you have no understanding, Its not a political theory or Model which can be altered as per the conditions exist ....... hope u would understand ......

 

[sur]

I been watching a few documentaries and what not, not necessarily on Islam, but just general conflicts within the ME.
Let's not talk about the political aspect of it, just the religious aspect, is there anyone for any religious reason against this?

Why not get a few thousand Imans and just reread and redefine and readdress what Islam means to people?


The Christians did this with ecumenical councils, and China unified Confucianism as the leading "religion" with the Wu emperor of Han when he himself a disciple of Confucianism changed from the previous "religion" and established 2 thousand years of Confucianism within China.


Now I don't want to sound insensitive to anyone, and I'm not blind to the fact the religious factors are a issue, but not the whole issue in terms of conflicts, regardless of religion people are going to have conflicts, but eliminating a factor is still a good call.

I'm not making a thread on Christianity because its importance has more or less faded, so protestants, Catholics, doesn't matter, while china just isn't religious at all.

Would you mind sharing what religion you practice?

On topic::: If you followed my posts, I try to "fix" issues with islam i.e. misunderstandings wrong rituals that have made their way into muslim cultural practices & beliefs, that were NOT there at time of Prophet Muhammad nor they are in Quran. But ppl see such practices all the time in muslim cultures, so they start believing those are part of islam, in fact they are not...

I like the terminology like "re-define", because many things muslims practice are based on "interpretation". Many interpretation were done by so-called imams/scholars at various times in history. Of course their interpretation would be influenced by culture\circumstances of their up-bringing. Even personal liking-disliking would have influenced their interpretations.

So yes, "re-read" and "re-define" are terms I won't have a problem with, as long as basics of islam are not jeopardized. .

.
.
.

Putting the words "redefinition" and "Qur'an" in the same sentence, is pretty insensitive. They believe that these are the Holy and unchanged words from their God. Thus it can't be compared to Confucianism in any way.

I don't think it's insensitive bcoz he is not asking to give up the belief in Quran as a message from God, just re-define, re-interpret... Because even among muslim sects various groups "define" certain parts of Quran differently. So we can say that various scholars have "re-defined" Quran already, & many times over history, according to their own understanding of it. And their cultural values & personal likings\dislikings, level-of knowledge, would have influenced the interpretation. Now culture have changed, times change. So any interpretation that was influenced back then would not fit well with newer\changed circumstances.


Like their are ppl who have interpreted a certain verse as if it makes musical instruments haraam(forbidden) but majority of others don't define that verse that way and have other explanation.

...So what we really need is a mass slaughter of these pigs not a tea party LOL.

A better approach would be to talk to them, argue with them, educate them. Target the discrepancy they have in their understanding. Come with strong evidence-based & logical arguments to defeat their corrupted concepts. But of-course for the violent ones iron-fist it is.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Now I don't want to sound insensitive to anyone.

Putting the words "redefinition" and "Qur'an" in the same sentence, is pretty insensitive.

They believe that these are the Holy and unchanged words from their God.

Thus it can't be compared to Confucianism in any way.

 

[KingMamba]

I thought about that, but you can't let a few people ruin it. The extremist have their thinking and not necessarily based on anything. They are against everything, even if you change to them, they would still find something else.

But this move may make the moderates a little more moderate. At least eliminate certain differences for some people and eliminate it more and more for younger generations.

@darkinsky

I don't have to be, I never gave a direction, or what not on Islam, but unity for the people is a goal, every nation and people has been striving.

A moderate by definition is moderate what are you trying to say lmao ?

I do not think you know what our differences are exactly but you are trying to bridge them lol.

 

[Pakistanisage]

For Muslims, Islam is an emotional Topic which does not lend itself for much Debate.

With due respect, this is not a good topic to open a thread.

BTW, an overwhelming number of Muslims throughout the World condemn the terrorist and do not support them.

The correct approach would be to destroy the terrorist and condemn their acts.

Peace.

 

[Hyperion]

Mate, one thing is for sure, we as a nation (not so-called-ummah) are touchy about everything that we can't debate. Is it really how you would like to define Islam to our future generation and our own kids? When they ask a question, we say: 'Hey, that's how it is, now shut up, else I'll get angry' ????

For Muslims, Islam is an emotional Topic which does not lend itself for much Debate.

With due respect, this is not a good topic to open a thread.

BTW, an overwhelming number of Muslims throughout the World condemn the terrorist and do not support them.

The correct approach would be to destroy the terrorist and condemn their acts.

Peace.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

For Muslims, Islam is an emotional Topic which does not lend itself for much Debate.

With due respect, this is not a good topic to open a thread.

BTW, an overwhelming number of Muslims throughout the World condemn the terrorist and do not support them.

The correct approach would be to destroy the terrorist and condemn their acts.

Peace.

You are right. Those terrorists do not even follow the basic principles of Islam.

Even though I am an Atheist, I know that Islam forbids suicide and the killing of innocents.

The problem is illiteracy and people using religion for their own dirty politics.

 

[Pakistanisage]

I couldn't have said it any better myself.

The key is to keep destroying the Terrorist / Extremist Scum.

We do not agree with their perverted version of Islam nor do we have any sympathy for their Causes.

 

[Genesis]

For Muslims, Islam is an emotional Topic which does not lend itself for much Debate.

With due respect, this is not a good topic to open a thread.

BTW, an overwhelming number of Muslims throughout the World condemn the terrorist and do not support them.

The correct approach would be to destroy the terrorist and condemn their acts.

Peace.

I understand, for China the emperors had the same effect. You attribute everything to them and you don't blame them for anything. The thing the West doesn't understand THESE DAYS due to their own extremists, like the French revolutionaries, are it is not done out of fear, but of respect. For those that don't know, unlike Western ideas or even Muslim idea of king, Chinese emperors are son of God, they are God in their own right. If China was ever religious the Emperor would be the center of it.

It's one of the reasons when I open the thread I didn't say how to redefine and what to redefine, but simply there is this divide and why not mend it. The discussion should focus more on that rather than on Islam itself.

I'm not talking about the terrorists per say, but I'm unclear on this. Were the Shia or Sunni once the same people but just different beliefs? Were all muslim sects once the same people or different people different interpretation?


@KingMamba

you are correct I don't know the exact divide, but that's to my advantage in this case, as I am an outsider, and thus impartial to the whole thing. I'm not taking sides and I am just bring up a topic. Would you really want someone who would even a little bit biased be starting this topic on Islam?

@sur

You are right I am not saying the Qu'ran is wrong or anything like that, I am simply interested in knowing, why not a universal understanding of Islam. Everyone believes in God, there is only one Islam, so in essence there should be just the one understanding.

I'll admit my religious understanding is limited to history, if there's one thing I have that is close to religion it is nationalism. But my thinking is as a third party I would be less offensive, since I am not, in favor or not in favor, of anything. But that's me.

@HRK

I'm not saying change the Qu'ran, but how people view it, we have preachers and Imans to teach us about religion, but much of it is the school of thought they follow. My redefinition, to my intentions at least, is to let all the religious people redefine their understanding of the Qu'ran of Islam, to have one view on the religion, to unite people under the one religion that they all practice, but are somehow less united because of it.

To my limited understanding, aren't all Muslims brother and sisters, but is that the case even amongst moderates.





I understand the sensitivity of the issue, if people desire it to be closed/deleted, I don't mind.

 

[Bilal.]

The Islamic way would be to answer and explain to him with respect and logic. Genesis asked a question without the intent of disrespecting and he deserves an answer without disrespecting. Wasn't it something that the Prophet(S.A.W) used to do?

A request to all would be posters.