The Tragedy of TYRANNICAL-minds (formerly 'free-minds')

[Navid]

That's all Im asking for here : responsible, amicable discussion.

Seconded.

[splatter]

I'm new to this God Alone thingy and have spend weeks reading this forum. I don't see any tyrannical minds but opposing views. And I think it's healthy to have such views. Also, I'm interested to read such views but maybe that's just me.

[stillearning]

Salaam all
The problem is not those who are outright in their criticism of the Quran for they are easy to spot and deal with or to be ignored. My issue is with those on this forum (including some of the moderators) who have specific agenda to subtly distort Islam (No salaat, Haj in Timbuktu, Mohd never existed-making up history as you go along appears to be the flavour of the month). Any how as usual i have allowed myself to be distracted from what i wanted to say which simply was:

BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD (Gandhi)
Regards

re

[truth]

mquran,

You have again shown your contradictory nature by saying firstly to me...

I don't give a monkeys about your 'Netiquette for Dummies', Truth.

rejecting the advice I have given you and then stating shortly after...

I disagree with Kyle on a lot of his points, but I have no problem with him because he understands ETIQUETTE of discussion.

So how do you go from not giving a "monkeys" about etiquette to appreciating it?

Reading your posts reveals a highly contradictory nature, and in many instances you project your own weaknesses fancifully upon others. You cannot excuse yourself by covering up your flawed character with an alleged "AQ" approach. Your incoherence and repeated contradictions, undermines any other thing of (limited) value you may post.

[mquran]

Stilllearning: The problem is not those who are outright in their criticism of the Quran for they are easy to spot and deal with or to be ignored. My issue is with those on this forum (including some of the moderators) who have specific agenda to subtly distort Islam (No salaat, Haj in Timbuktu, Mohd never existed-making up history as you go along appears to be the flavour of the month).

I have to say SL that this kind of free-mindedness is what makes FM what it is. Other forums including Shabbirs, IIPC, Toluislam (to a much lesser extent) will never tolerate such questions. The Questions aren't the problem. The problem lies with standing up to one's views or the guts to say 'I dont have evidence, this is just my feeling'. There are people here who bring forward views without deigning to back them up. They even say this verse is false, that verse is false and when evidence is asked, they don't think its worth giving. Yes, THAT'S a problem and such people should be removed for distorting AQ.

Historically, Timbuktu was the centre of a Muhammadan civilisation, so yes its quite possible was there.

[mquran]

Truth: So how do you go from not giving a "monkeys" about etiquette to appreciating it?

Truth, I have to introduce you to something. Now brace yourself, because this is heavy. It's an alphabet. It's called 'N'. It can make a difference as with this example:

I don't give a monkeys about your '*N*etiquette for Dummies', Truth

Say it after me...*N*etiquette, NOT Etiquette. Your *netiquette* is this case refers to your 'attention seeking troll' phrase. AQ contradicts it but not that you care, you probably remove whatever verse doesn't suit you.

I disagree with Kyle on a lot of his points, but I have no problem with him because he understands ETIQUETTE of discussion

Now see, this doesn't have the letter 'n' thus making it plain old 'etiquette'. It refers to how one conducts oneself, in this case a discussion.

Reading your posts reveals a highly contradictory nature, and in many instances you project your own weaknesses fancifully upon others. You cannot excuse yourself by covering up your flawed character with an alleged "AQ" approach. Your incoherence and repeated contradictions, undermines any other thing of (limited) value you may post

I ask you to bring the many intances if you're truthful.

I ask you to bring my contradictions forth and to answer any answers which I gave to that acccusation, as in this thread. We'll break it down logically together, if you care to back up your claims.

It's really sad when a man of your intelligence has to scrape the bottom of the barrel like this. Are you so devoid of arguments now?

The *truth* is you want an implicit permission to defecate your views here. Where else could a man of your megalomania do it? Presuming to DELETE VERSES from AQ without evidence. Do yourself a favour..'truth' doesn't suit you. How about 'falsehood' ?

[Danish]

What is criticism? Lets have a closer look:
1. The act of criticizing, especially adversely.
2. A critical comment or judgment.
3. a. The practice of analyzing, classifying, interpreting, or evaluating literary or other artistic works.
    b. A critical article or essay; a critique.
    c. The investigation of the origin and history of literary documents; textual criticism.


As far as his ?allowing and fairness of criticisms? is concerned, here?s what mquran said:

This is NOT a suggestion to stop stop allowing criticisms of AQ. Criticisms of AQ can help us to see just how invulnerable AQ is.
Rather, this is a suggestion to insert fairness into a discussion.

Criticism is a good thing.

There's no harm per se in saying 'AQ is an old book, not suitable for modern times'

When I and Enquirer mentioned this very statement above, he jumped head-over-heels in defiance and here he is saying that ?there?s no harm?.

These criticism which mquran fancies in all ?fairness into a discussion? becomes defecations and urinations onto Quran, hence his brutal condemnation:

The issue is, very simply, that people are coming, DEFECATING or URINATING metaphorically on what the believers* consider the book of God. I use these strong words because if one aimed to clarify or criticise, one should stick around for the answers. Be responsible, not scum.

Danish is a good example of a defecator.

It's difficult for me to sit by and watch AQ being lied about.

When you stop lying about the Quran yourself, others will follow.

It's time for me to hibernate again, with my own projects etc. For the believers in this forum, lets think about how we can clean up this forum. If we cannot do it via authority, perhaps a show of solidarity?

He wants to hibernate but at the same time he wants a total evaporation of all un-quranists, which includes all sunnies and shias, as well as all other believers in GOD (just about the entire world ? over 6 billion people). In contrast, he advocates criticism but then opposes them. If this is not insane, coming out of a ?prophet of doom?, then what is?

These are provocative responses. Rather, you could go 'I disagree' and move on.

Here he advocates others to simply proclaim ?I disagree? without having to explain what he/she is disagreeing about and then grunts about not being explanatory or being vague or ?hit and run or hide?. So then, when someone explains his/her disagreement, these become ?provocative responses?. Even a dead horse will wake up to smell such nonsense.

You're not here to further discussions but to cause mischief.

Mquran delivers an unwarranted dilemma to vein out of and divert attention from subject matter and then boasts about ?ETIQUETTE of discussion? and then blaming others of causing mischief. This thread itself is just one of his ways to cause mischief among all members colorfully painting his own ?ETIQUETTE of discussion?. This happens quite often when he becomes defenseless or unable to confront direct criticism, since they become a ?threat? to his alleged supreme yet embarrassing knowledge and understanding of the Quran. He is even more threatened when someone brings about external sources to explain its internal relevancy; historical facts to support a historical book.

He also diverted attention from calling upon moderated debates for which he himself was jumping around like a monkey all over the forum, whining and bickering about it and for crying out loud to moderators again and again like baby crying for milk. He seemed scared to death when I subjected him to one of the conditions being met and deliberately went on rampage. I assure him that he won?t pass my very first session of quranic criticism and he has no idea what I am going to talk about. He thinks that a kid like OpenMind will bring a stupid one and make his life easier. The three contradictions/inconsistencies that were bought about have yet to be constructively analyzed and defended and not washed away by flowery discourses, apples and bananas and blah, blahs. 

That's all Im asking for here : responsible, amicable discussion.

This is not found in your ?dictionary?. Just dream on.

Finally, mquran can't seem to comperhend that there is a  "Critical Examination of Islam" section for the purpose of what he calls defecations and urinations as criticisms. Here, let me feed this poor unwilling and arrogant kid to understand what the headings state:

"What is the nature of God?"
(For those who question/doubt the nature/existence of a Creator.)

and

"Quranic Divinity"
(For those who question/doubt the authenticity, authorship and relevance of the Scripture.)

If you are not interested in constructive criticism of Quranic Divinity, then refrain and avoid yourself from further embarrasment without bickering and blabbing around all over the forum advocating mischief, resentment and condemnation. Let those who want to better discuss these issues come forward. It is as simple as that.

Mquran, watch this video once again and contemplate on the mirrored effects you?re thumping about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBplylx55Zc&mode=related&search=mullah 

You seriously need is a psychiatric help.

[mquran]

Danish:You seriously need is a psychiatric help.

Those madrassa people really should import a qualified english teacher.

What is criticism? Lets have a closer look:
1. The act of criticizing, especially adversely.
2. A critical comment or judgment.
3. a. The practice of analyzing, classifying, interpreting, or evaluating literary or other artistic works.
    b. A critical article or essay; a critique.
    c. The investigation of the origin and history of literary documents; textual criticism

Your dictionary is not my furqaan. My furqaan is AQ and its concept of jidaal/argumention doesnt include part 3c. It's sad that your limited capacities cannot grasp this, but hey-ho.

Quote
There's no harm per se in saying 'AQ is an old book, not suitable for modern times'
When I and Enquirer mentioned this very statement above, he jumped head-over-heels in defiance and here he is saying that ?there?s no harm?.

Did you madrassa teach you to lie or did they forget to teach you how read complete paragraphs? Here's what I said:

Criticism is a good thing. There's no harm per se in saying 'AQ is an old book, not suitable for modern times' but if you're going to say it, stand by it. What is modernity and why is *it* our criteria? This the critics of AQ have refused to face. This isn't about accepting AQ as divine, this is about decency.

It's only a low and deceptive person who would use such tactics. You're really the bottom of the barrel, Danish.

[savage_carrot]

Okay, lockdown as it's getting off track. Start another one for suggestions in the proper section if there is any need.