The Modernist Threat, and What YOU can do!

[- Qatada -]

The Modernist Threat, and What YOU can do!

Changing Islam - Modernist Movements


There are new movements under different titles today, with the aim of changing the Islam revealed to Prophet Muhammad, and the way his companions understood it.

All of these groups have the same motives, but through different means. But they're main aim is to alter and make Islam a watered down religion, and they want to reach a target where Islam is purely secularistic [religion separate from politics, and your religion is only between 'you and God']. These groups are usually called 'Progressives', but alot of Muslims like to call them Modernists or even Regressives!, and many good Muslim 'ulama/scholars say they are disbelievers since they want to make the true Islam lower, and falsehood higher.


Obviously, we all know there's a global warfare against Muslims. This isn't just for oil, and other resources of the Muslims, but its intent is to change Islam and destroy all those Muslims who want a Shari'a state [a state running under Islamic laws from Qur'an and Sunnah] or anything similar to it - where Islam affects the public lifestyle.





Funding

The USA, European nations, and other countries (who are naturally subservient to the USA, and Europe due to international pressures) are funding these organisations.



There's 2 types of organisations who are funded;

1) Those who criticize the pure Islam, such as the Qur'an and Sunnah. So you will see them attack Islam continuously through the media, and misquote verses and distort the meanings, and not allow Muslims to explain what is truly meant. Movements such as the Hadeeth Rejectors are also being funded for this purpose, because if you reject the Sunnah, you've rejected the biography of Allah's Messenger, and therefore you won't accept his life [which had a huge part where he fought against others who opposed him, and implemented Islam politically etc]. This is done to keep the Muslims in a state of fear from them, so we feel inferior and hopeless against them.


2) The organisations who are payed to change the interpretation of these verses from Qur'an and Sunnah, so you'll see them changing the original verses of fighting and arguing that it's extreme, since we're all under global peace, and other emotional arguments. They will get payed to distort the meanings, and they will be funded to get promoted in the media in a good light. I.e. as Moderates etc.

They are continuously being funded to make a new version of Islam, so you'll see that in Oxford university and other universities being built in Germany etc. - they are being funded in the millions to get all the 'great Muslim minds' of today and form a new interpretation of Islam which suits what we are explaining of Modernism, and then to teach these interpretations to the youth of tomorrow.

To many innocent, but ignorant Muslims, they are glad - because they get a feeling of hope when the media says anything good about Islam. But this is intentionally done so Muslims feel good, but indirectly about a modernist movement. Muslims will be happy that someone is representing Islam as good, so the Muslim will look up and respect a figure without a beard, instead of a 'Mulla' who is fighting in Iraq who is too extreme [because the media says so.]

Muslims who don't know their religion, you have to know your religion today to know what is truly right. Your ignorance is an advantage for them, but your knowledge is a sign of making your religion superior.



So you see that they use a method of hope and fear for the Muslims, and these feelings we should be really giving to Allah firstly [of hope and fear]. Not to those who disbelieve and spread lies about Allah's religion, while pretending to make you feel happy about yourself.




There's many examples to prove this;

So you'll see that those who fight in Allah's cause to defend their own brothers and sisters, they'll be terrorists even in some ignorant Muslims eyes! Yet when a 'Muslim woman' is appointed as an Envoy for the American government, the Muslims rejoice.

Obama is purposelly placed as a head for the USA, so the ignorant Muslims believe that its a 'new start' between the Muslim world and the Western world, when Allah informs us continuously in the Qur'an that the disbelievers won't be happy until you leave your religion [Al Baqara 2:120, Qalam 68:9].


There are other neutral scenarios, like if you remember when the Muslim who gave 40$ as charity to the thief who wanted to steal from his shop, and the thief became Muslim due to the Muslims mercy. So the media will twist this and say that he was a Modernist Muslim - to portray their false views out of something good which a non modernist Sunni Muslim did.

You're better off being accused of being Wahabbi, even if you're not.


There's one more step which has been used continuously by these modernists, and this is by spreading names which don't really belong to someone to cause confusion amongst the Muslims themselves, so they don't know who is who.

The classical one is Wahabbi, and I tell you this - if these movements term you as a wahabbi, then that is something good.

Do you know the hadith about Dajjal showing hellfire in one hand and Paradise in the other? Which one did Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) tell us to jump into? The fire right? Since it is deception against you. So in this case, if a Wahabbi is someone who wants Muslims to fight in Allah's cause - to make Allah's religion the highest, and he wants the Sunnah of Allah's Messenger to be the highest, and they still call you Wahabbi [even if you disagree with 'their' beliefs] - then be pleased, because you are still following the more accurate Islam out of the two (moderate vs way of Companions of the Prophet.)

They have also hijacked the term 'Salafis' and said that they are now moderates. So don't be fooled if you follow the Salafi dawah and they call you someone 'peaceful', only be pleased if they call you Wahabbi. And the reason for this is because they have continuously used this term since the time of the colonialsts as something bad, and they can't change this term for something good - otherwise the Muslims (who use this term against other Muslims) and Non Muslims [who hear it on the media] will start to doubt the medias shouts against Islam and become more confused




So what should be done?

1) You should learn your religion, from the Qur'an and Sunnah. Read the evidences, and try to find as much quotes of the companions of Prophet Muhammad, and the 3 best generations of the Muslims to understand the religion the best [Tafsir.com is a good site for this.]. Focus on these will make it more harder for the modernists to twist the facts. Whereas to read the Qur'an only without a true understanding of the companions of the Prophet, or the 3 best generations - will make you the lone sheep, prone to the attacks of the greedy wolves in our time who want to find any way to destroy the religion.


2) We need to practise our religion fully. The biggest advantage for them is our ignorance of our religion, and the biggest threat to them is us practising our religion with knowledge.

So you see that they cannot introduce their watered down version of Islam yet, since they have alot of work to do to actually produce a moderate version which can replace the original religion of Allah's Messenger, and the way his companions and the salaf [3 best generations of the Muslims] understood it.

So during the time they are producing this watered down religion, they are trying to pressurise those who do follow Islam (i.e. see all the headlines on Niqab) in the true way and imprisoning or spoiling their reputation etc. All this is done to whittle down the number of true followers of the Sunnah [Prophetic way], so that by the time they introduce their watered down version of Islam - they can quickly get rid of them and force their moderate Islam onto the masses of ignorant Muslims.


3) The more we practise our religion, the harder they will find it to introduce their watered down version of Islam, due to the opposition of those who follow the true Islam. So we need to keep firm, as a majority - who stick to the true Islam continuously, while teaching the true Islam to our children. Otherwise they will take advantage of that.


4) We need to make du'a (prayer/supplication) to Allah to give us victory. The best weapon of the believer is prayer. The prayer can change destiny, so if we all prayed - Allah could change what happens in the future, but if we did not pray to Him - He may make the oppressors superior over us. If you love Allah's religion, then you will ask Him to protect it, and us.

The Good News!

We have Muslim Converts in the thousands today, yes - Muslims also give birth alot alhamdulillah, but we still have thousands of converts joining Islam today while the media and governments attack Islam from every side. So you need to teach your brothers and sisters who join the faith the true Islam. We see that many of their reputation is spoilt by the media, because they want to especially show the converts in a bad light. So you need to honour them, and love them so they are safe by the will of Allah, like the companions of the Prophet loved each other, even though they were from different classes, tribes and colours.

Another piece of good news is that there is a revival of the teachings of the Qur'an and Sunnah, and the way of the companions and Salaf. This is good news because before Islam fell down and lost its Caliphate, most people only followed Islam on certain rituals, and that's about it. Most never knew the evidences of the religion, and had to just blindly follow anyone or anything. But then, when Islam was about to fall at its weakest level, Allah revived it so we see that whenever a non practising Muslim becomes practising, a Muslim shows him a verse from Qur'an or Sunnah on Allah's Mercy, and if a Convert becomes Muslim - you see that a Muslim shows him the hadith of 'Amr ibn al 'Aas all your past sins being forgiven after Islam. So you see, there's a revival of the true Islam, from its true sources, and a revival of its defense too from our own youth!


One more good can be seen from 20 years ago, where fighting in the cause of Allah had died out.. only a small minority in the world was fighting, but through the likes of Abdullah Azzam, Allah revived it, like the Times newspaper said, that he was the reviver of Ji had in the 20th century. Now you hear of so much different groups throughout the world trying to establish an Islam on pure Qur'an and Sunnah, on the way of the companions. This wasn't happening 20 years ago, but now its flourishing; from Iraq, to Afghanistan, to Somalia, so that if one fails - anothers head rises. Yes, the brothers might make mistakes, but isn't it good that they are actually reviving Islam like we've always wanted? If Allah's Messenger told us that if 3 people set off on a journey, one should be the leader of them - then what about the obligation on having 1 leader for the whole ummah?! So forgive them, and have good thoughts about them, since Allah prefers those who fight in His cause more than those who sit at home [Tawba 9:20].




You will be superior...


So you see brothers and sisters, that Islam is becoming superior, a whole revival is going on around the world, and Islam is becoming higher, even though the disbelievers are trying to change it. Allah has promised to protect His religion,Indeed, Allah will surely support those who support Him (His cause).) (Quran Hajj 22:40) - so if you support His cause, He will aid you - so practise His original religion and call to it!

“So do not weaken and do not grieve, and you will be superior if you are [true] believers.” [Quran 3: 139]

So you will be superior, Allah will provide a way out - from ways we couldn't imagine - only, if we fulfill the conditions of being true believers.



So he says [meaning];

Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good that He will most certainly make them rulers in the earth as He made rulers those before them, and that He will most certainly establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them, and that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them security in exchange; they shall serve Me, not associating aught with Me; and whoever is ungrateful after this, these it is who are the. transgressors.

[Qur'an Nur 20:55]

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

:sl:

MashaAllah I like this. JazakAllah Khair for sharing bro :) Did you write this?

:w:

[catalzzy]

:sl:

:D. yeah it happens to me alot yet i dont even care about what they say, cos i know Allah s.w.t in my heart.

Mashallah.

[The_Prince]

there are many of them appearding in the mid-east too, some of these modernists in the mid-east even make the modernists in the west look extreme!

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[AntiKarateKid]

I find that reverts help to curb this because they tend to be stricter than born Muslims.

[Joe98]

Here is an example of Muslims forced to change their religion because they live in the West


http://www.voanews.com/english/archi...1d31216964a373


Airport officials say a few Muslim taxi drivers also refuse to carry passengers with animals, especially dogs. Hassan Mohamoud, a local Muslim spiritual leader or imam, says Islam considers dogs unclean.

College student Nickie Coby is blind and uses a service dog. She is concerned that people with service dogs are not allowed in some taxis. "When you agree to become a cab driver, I think, to some extent you have to be willing to transport everyone," she says.

If the new regulations are passed, drivers who refuse passengers the first time will have their airport taxi license suspended for 30 days. The next time they lose their license for two years.

Somali taxi driver Muse Mohamud thinks the penalties are too harsh. "It's wrong if they suspend the license for somebody because of his faith or religion," he says. "It's absolutely wrong, wrong."

But cab driver Rick Heil sees things differently. "Even though it may fall against somebody's religious beliefs", the benefit should go to the person who needs the service," he says.


-

[Zafran]

Here is an example of Muslims forced to change their religion because they live in the West


http://www.voanews.com/english/archi...1d31216964a373


Airport officials say a few Muslim taxi drivers also refuse to carry passengers with animals, especially dogs. Hassan Mohamoud, a local Muslim spiritual leader or imam, says Islam considers dogs unclean.

College student Nickie Coby is blind and uses a service dog. She is concerned that people with service dogs are not allowed in some taxis. "When you agree to become a cab driver, I think, to some extent you have to be willing to transport everyone," she says.

If the new regulations are passed, drivers who refuse passengers the first time will have their airport taxi license suspended for 30 days. The next time they lose their license for two years.

Somali taxi driver Muse Mohamud thinks the penalties are too harsh. "It's wrong if they suspend the license for somebody because of his faith or religion," he says. "It's absolutely wrong, wrong."

But cab driver Rick Heil sees things differently. "Even though it may fall against somebody's religious beliefs", the benefit should go to the person who needs the service," he says.


-

First of all thats in america so shouldnt the right of freedom of religion have any bases - second what does that have ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE THREAD??? - the article also isnt about the "west" changing the religion of Islam - It might even be a violatiion of the american idea of freedom of religion?

[Zafran]

salaam

Back to the thread - the "wahabbi" movement was also a modern one - it started in SAUDI arabia. Ibn Saud (a supporter of the movement) did back the the colonists powers against the Ottoman Caliphate.

[Joe98]

Because according to the story, having a dog in a muslim owned taxi is against the teachings of Islam.

So, if the muslim taxi driver makes an exception for blind people, the taxi driver is Changing Islam - which is the topic of this thread. Or, to quote from the original post above:

"but its intent is to change Islam and destroy all those Muslims who want a Shari'a state......"

-

[Trumble]

Hardly up to me to comment, of course, but if you are worried about the point of view of these 'modernists' I would try to engage them in debate to establish who is right and who is wrong. Attend meetings of these groups and try and guide them towards your point of view - and try and understand theirs, even if you do not agree with it.

This appears to just be another manifestation of the reformer v. conservative/reactionary dispute that has occured in both politics and religion throughout history. If all you can offer are scare stories about 'global warfare against muslims' and shady funding by 'the West', though, it just suggests you have no real arguments to offer.

[Foxhole]

Hardly up to me to comment, of course, but if you are worried about the point of view of these 'modernists' I would try to engage them in debate to establish who is right and who is wrong. Attend meetings of these groups and try and guide them towards your point of view - and try and understand theirs, even if you do not agree with it.

This appears to just be another manifestation of the reformer v. conservative/reactionary dispute that has occured in both politics and religion throughout history. If all you can offer are scare stories about 'global warfare against muslims' and shady funding by 'the West', though, it just suggests you have no real arguments to offer.

Arguments don't win wars.

[Gator]

Here's the review of a book concerning how religions have changed over time. The book looks interesting and I thought it fit this thread concerning how religion changes. Its very broad in its approach, but has some interesting points. Thanks.

link: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/bo...tion%20&st=cse


No Smiting

By PAUL BLOOM
Published: June 24, 2009

God has mellowed. The God that most Americans worship occasionally gets upset about abortion and gay marriage, but he is a softy compared with the Yahweh of the Hebrew Bible. That was a warrior God, savagely tribal, deeply insecure about his status and willing to commit mass murder to show off his powers. But at least Yahweh had strong moral views, occasionally enlightened ones, about how the Israelites should behave. His hunter-gatherer ancestors, by contrast, were doofus gods.

[- Qatada -]

salaam

Back to the thread - the "wahabbi" movement was also a modern one - it started in SAUDI arabia. Ibn Saud (a supporter of the movement) did back the the colonists powers against the Ottoman Caliphate.

Asalam alykum brother :)

http://ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=243

Please dont debate about it, otherwise the thread will be closed down. If you want to discuss the issue more, plz PM me.


Trumble, this is a political issue more than a debatable one. If the conservative or traditional muslims debated the modernists, the conservatives would win, but an opportunity like that isnt given to them for that exact reason. Think about it, who knows more about the religion of Islam, Prophet Muhammads companions who lived with him all their life, seeing his every action and movement? Or someone who comes a 1,400years after and says that they are wrong and 'i know better'?

[GreyKode]

Here is an example of Muslims forced to change their religion because they live in the West


http://www.voanews.com/english/archi...1d31216964a373


Airport officials say a few Muslim taxi drivers also refuse to carry passengers with animals, especially dogs. Hassan Mohamoud, a local Muslim spiritual leader or imam, says Islam considers dogs unclean.

College student Nickie Coby is blind and uses a service dog. She is concerned that people with service dogs are not allowed in some taxis. "When you agree to become a cab driver, I think, to some extent you have to be willing to transport everyone," she says.

If the new regulations are passed, drivers who refuse passengers the first time will have their airport taxi license suspended for 30 days. The next time they lose their license for two years.

Somali taxi driver Muse Mohamud thinks the penalties are too harsh. "It's wrong if they suspend the license for somebody because of his faith or religion," he says. "It's absolutely wrong, wrong."

But cab driver Rick Heil sees things differently. "Even though it may fall against somebody's religious beliefs", the benefit should go to the person who needs the service," he says.


-

This is ridiculous.
It is well known that there are all sorts of transportation media that don't allow animals in them. Have you ever seen a dog on a plane or a train.
Probably they don't want animals in their cars because of fear that the animal might **** in there or something.
I wouldn't allow a dog in my car mainly because of that reason, not because it is impure.
You should understand that the dog is considered in Islam unclean mainly because of its saliva, which causes one's purity to be void, making him unable to pray.
As long as the dog doesn't drool around things are fine..

[Foxhole]

This is ridiculous.
It is well known that there are all sorts of transportation media that don't allow animals in them. Have you ever seen a dog on a plane or a train.
Probably they don't want animals in their cars because of fear that the animal might **** in there or something.
I wouldn't allow a dog in my car mainly because of that reason, not because it is impure.
You should understand that the dog is considered in Islam unclean mainly because of its saliva, which causes one's purity to be void, making him unable to pray.
As long as the dog doesn't drool around things are fine..

US air carriers must allow guide dogs to fly.

http://www.iaadp.org/usdot-may2008-a...ance.html#guid

[Muezzin]

Because according to the story, having a dog in a muslim owned taxi is against the teachings of Islam.

So, if the muslim taxi driver makes an exception for blind people, the taxi driver is Changing Islam - which is the topic of this thread.

No. If the Muslim taxi driver makes an ‘exception’ for blind people, it is not changing Islam at all. I don’t know what gave you that idea. Generally, dogs are not allowed as pets. Guide dogs for the blind are allowed, and are allowed to go wherever their owner needs them, including the home. Guard dogs are permitted but not allowed in the home.

Now maybe we can return to the topic.

[Muhaba]

Great article. Thanks for posting! I'm glad to hear muslims are becoming more knowledgeable about Quraan & Sunnah/hadith. I hope a time comes when everyone follows Islam properly & most muslims quote a verse or hadith at every occasion. That would be awesome!

[YusufNoor]

Because according to the story, having a dog in a muslim owned taxi is against the teachings of Islam.

So, if the muslim taxi driver makes an exception for blind people, the taxi driver is Changing Islam - which is the topic of this thread. Or, to quote from the original post above:

"but its intent is to change Islam and destroy all those Muslims who want a Shari'a state......"

-

show me where it says in the Qur'an or Hadeeth that you cannot transport a service dog in your taxi?

[Paragon]

This wasn't happening 20 years ago, but now its flourishing; from Iraq, to Afghanistan, to Somalia, so that if one fails - anothers head rises. Yes, the brothers might make mistakes, but isn't it good that they are actually reviving Islam like we've always wanted?

For your information, I think you might want to rethink this rosy picture of yours, especially when it comes to Somalia. I am a son of Somalia and what we have in Somalia is hardly a religious war or anything with any moral compus. The Al-Shabaab of Somalia (known by Somalis as Al-Shaydaan) are truly disgusting. I don't want to go into more details as concerns them. It'll be a waste of time.

PS: Trust me, the Al-Shabaab's a company for thrill-seekers all over the world, coming to Somalia to use Quran Hafids as shooting targets. Their work is more like a holiday services for well off guys with mercenary wet dreams who put their day job on hold to live out their fantasy killings. A warcraft game for them.

They said they fight for Islam? God forbid!

[Amadeus85]

The modernists are threat to every monotheistic religions. Lets just look what they did to larrge part of judaism in USA, especially in New York (so called reformed judaism).

[Pygoscelis]

Religions change over time. I see this as a good thing. My favourite book on this subject is "A History of God" by Karen Armstrong. I will encourage any reformers who seek to morph a religion into something more friendly and tolerant towards outsiders to itself and less interested in controlling others. I'll research these groups and depending on what I find maybe I'll make a donation.

[AntiKarateKid]

Religions change over time. I see this as a good thing. My favourite book on this subject is "A History of God" by Karen Armstrong. I will encourage any reformers who seek to morph a religion into something more friendly and tolerant towards outsiders to itself and less interested in controlling others. I'll research these groups and depending on what I find maybe I'll make a donation.

How has Islam changed?

[KAding]

Same old, same old. This struggle between 'moderates' and 'conservatives' is as old as religion itself. Different interpretations, same religion.

It's up to Muslim to decide who they want to follow I suppose.

[جوري]

How has Islam changed?

What were you expecting honestly? some noetic resolution from a character who believes that doing charity means disseminating anti-religious rhetoric?

:w:

[Zafran]

Same old, same old. This struggle between 'moderates' and 'conservatives' is as old as religion itself. Different interpretations, same religion.

It's up to Muslim to decide who they want to follow I suppose.

Its not about Moderates and conservatives its about Modernists. Even someone who can be defined as moderate can be conservative at the same time as Islam sees itself as the middle way.

[AntiKarateKid]

What were you expecting honestly? some noetic resolution from a character who believes that doing charity means disseminating anti-religious rhetoric?

:w:

If that is what he believes, then you're probably right.

On a separate note sister, I have to keep a dictionary open in another tab everytime I read one of your posts. Learned a new word today, noetic. :D

[KAding]

Its not about Moderates and conservatives its about Modernists. Even someone who can be defined as moderate can be conservative at the same time as Islam sees itself as the middle way.

I still don't quite understand what people mean by 'Modernists' though. Are these people secretly atheist, but don't they dare say it? Or are they Muslims who genuinely believe Islam does not teach what people like Qatada say it teaches?

[north_malaysian]

there are many of them appearding in the mid-east too, some of these modernists in the mid-east even make the modernists in the west look extreme!

Malaysia and Indonesia too...

[جوري]

I still don't quite understand what people mean by 'Modernists' though. Are these people secretly atheist, but don't they dare say it? Or are they Muslims who genuinely believe Islam does not teach what people like Qatada say it teaches?

They are not atheists.. to be an atheist or a theist you have to put some thought into it..

they are born of something but don't practice it..they are concerned with mundane affairs no more no less!

[AntiKarateKid]

I'd say a modernist is a person willing to compromise their belief (knowingly or unknowingly) in an attempt to conform to their current culture. Their practice is not based on scripture but rather their current culture and its set of standards.

[Zafran]

I still don't quite understand what people mean by 'Modernists' though. Are these people secretly atheist, but don't they dare say it? Or are they Muslims who genuinely believe Islam does not teach what people like Qatada say it teaches?

Yeah I think the other posters gave good replies - But dont get mixed about Modernists with Moderates and Conservatives - as they can mean the same thing.

I'd say a modernist is a person willing to compromise their belief (knowingly or unknowingly) in an attempt to conform to their current culture. Their practice is not based on scripture but rather their current culture and its set of standards.

[MSalman]

Religions change over time. I see this as a good thing.

care to elaborate on how this is a good thing? What is a religion: a custom food recipe whose ingredients change or should change from time to time and place to place to please the taste of people? Why should it change? Or if it changes what is evidence that it has changed for better?

[Pygoscelis]

I don't want to start a long discussion on how Islam in particular has changed over time, as I'm no expert in it. I did point you guys to a book "A history of God" by Karen Armstrong (who IS an expert in it). If you are interested in seeing how the 3 abrahamic religions have changed over time I highly recommend it.

As for things changing for the better, I suppose that depends entirely on perspective. I see religions changing to be less aggressive, less violent and less intolerant towards other religions and non-adherents. Christianity over the ages is a great case in point.

[Trumble]

care to elaborate on how this is a good thing? What is a religion: a custom food recipe whose ingredients change or should change from time to time and place to place to please the taste of people? Why should it change? Or if it changes what is evidence that it has changed for better?

Religions should change as the times change, the world changes, and people change. Such change is quite possible even within a framework of divinely revealed scripture (although it is easier without it), and occurs on a small scale each and every time such scripture is 'interpreted'.

The absence of such change means stagnation and, ultimately, irrelevance.

As for things changing for the better, I suppose that depends entirely on perspective. I see religions changing to be less aggressive, less violent and less intolerant towards other religions and non-adherents. Christianity over the ages is a great case in point.

Totally agree.

[Zafran]

As for things changing for the better, I suppose that depends entirely on perspective. I see religions changing to be less aggressive, less violent and less intolerant towards other religions and non-adherents. Christianity over the ages is a great case in point.

Thats because christainty got downplayed heavily - Now we have other systems that are creating the violence.

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Religions should change as the times change, the world changes, and people change. Such change is quite possible even within a framework of divinely revealed scripture (although it is easier without it), and occurs on a small scale each and every time such scripture is 'interpreted'.

The absence of such change means stagnation and, ultimately, irrelevance.

Then soon it'll turn out like Christianity and other religions like it. When that happens, people will still be saying what you and the rest of those like you are saying. So no, I don't think so.

Stagnation and irrelevance because it won't be according to the whims of man. Wish as you may, but its ridiculous.

[Muezzin]

As for things changing for the better, I suppose that depends entirely on perspective. I see religions changing to be less aggressive, less violent and less intolerant towards other religions and non-adherents. Christianity over the ages is a great case in point.

Islam has been at that tolerant, non-aggressive, non-violent etc stage since its inception and notably during Europe's Dark Ages (meanwhile, Muslim lands were full of scientific and mathematical advances, were protecting and gathering books etc). Islam does not need to change. Certain Muslims do.

[Zafran]

Islam has been at that tolerant, non-aggressive, non-violent etc stage since its inception and notably during Europe's Dark Ages (meanwhile, Muslim lands were full of scientific and mathematical advances, were protecting and gathering books etc). Islam does not need to change. Certain Muslims do.

salaam

well said - I agree.

I'll also like to add also in the Ottoman empire.

peace

[Amadeus85]

Islam has been at that tolerant, non-aggressive, non-violent etc stage since its inception and notably during Europe's Dark Ages (meanwhile, Muslim lands were full of scientific and mathematical advances, were protecting and gathering books etc). Islam does not need to change. Certain Muslims do.

So how Islam spread during Medieval ? By Islamicboard?

[جوري]

^^you can use the search feature.. The topic is covered quite extensively from Arabia, to Persia to southeast Asia and Spain!

all the best

[Amadeus85]

^^you can use the search feature.. The topic is covered quite extensively from Arabia, to Persia to southeast Asia and Spain!

all the best

Yes I know Skye, I also believe that I have read it on this site several times. What I want to protest against is the sentence of Muezzin who wanted to compare aggressive, intolerant and warriorlike medieval Europe with tolerant, peacufeul Islam of those times. Obviously he forgot that before the first Crusade happenned, muslims were attacking Europe, from Spain, through Sicily to Constantinople for about 400 years.
And here I want to add that I dont think that religion should be just like from the hippie dreams, tolerant ala' Woodstock 69 or like all those "reformed" branches of New York judaism or american protestantism blessing gays and lesbians. But at least lets dont ignore facts like Muezzin did.

[جوري]

Actually that is not true at all.. I think perhaps your knowledge of history is skewed..
even if I were to accept it at all as a fact.. there is ethics to war, one only need to look at spain pre and after Islam before judging who brought what to whom.
Spain was the most enlightened city in all of Europe subsequent to Muslim rule, who by the way were invited there by the visigoth!

incidentally the first suicide bombers at all were from the nights Templar, killing a few of their own to get hundreds more Muslims..
little factoids they don't teach you in school!

[جوري]

Here is 17 pages worth of points back and forth, that I am simply not going to sum up for you:

http://www.islamicboard.com/clarific...ead-sword.html

[Shabir]

This thread when posted at AlMaghrib Forums - The Modernist Threat, and What YOU can do! ended up somewhere where none can see it.

is it because it is no more than a campaign to defame contemporary scholars who are actually trying to take us back to the olden day thus effectively trying to roll back the modernist threat that has been around for around 3 centuries?

I do not believe that any one cares whether we have shariah in our countries or not. so long as we do not have any defence industries and strong armed forces no one gives a hoot about the laws.

Saudi Arabia being a case in point; they have been subservient to UK since the beginning and they were allowed to have a form of shariah. and for defence they were allowed to hire soldiers from Pakistan and France etc. but now they are fully under the protection of USA yet still have shariah.

2 of the three countries that are under Western invasion, namely Iraq and Pakistan had no shariah but instead Iraq wanted a defence industry while Pakistan had one.

wasalam

[Amadeus85]

Ok so Islam born in first half of VII century in Arabia got in the same century to North Africa, Mezopothamia, Assyria, Egypt and Persia via war troops or sophisticated theological debates with Berbers, Assyrians, Persians etc etc. If Islam is civilization, law, way of life and religion in one so the arabic troops bringing the faith of the prophet to Persians, Berbers and Assyrians were doint it directly from the religious aims, just like the crusaders did 400 years later.
You say that Islam brought science and welfare to Spain? Well I might even agree. But jews say the same about Palestine - that they created a garden out of arabic deserts. Occupation is occupation.
To be precise I dont want to say that medieval Europe was human rights' champion, because it was not. Medieval Europe was everything but not modern secular Europe, in these good and bad points also. But Islam those times wasnt more peaceful, if it was, it might have remained in Arabia.

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Islam was and is as peaceful as can get. Just because it allows self defense, which includes fighting, doesn't mean its any less peaceful.

[MSalman]

Religions should change as the times change, the world changes, and people change.

you do not explain why, neither you give any logical evidence! So what if the world changes or the people change. How is this an evidence that rules should also change? How is this an evidence that if the rules are changed then in fact they are changed for better! Whether we live in 21st century or 1st century is irrelevant to teachings of the religion and morality in general. There might be some minor changes - this variability is allowed in Islam - but generally speaking changes in time and world has no relevancy to established rulings and teachings.

Look at this way for example, killing an innocent person is still deemed moral, regardless of our changes and advancements. If so why should the punishment for such a crime be different from that which was in the past! If you disagree then why the crime itself is not considered moral today!?

Such change is quite possible even within a framework of divinely revealed scripture (although it is easier without it), and occurs on a small scale each and every time such scripture is 'interpreted'.

agreed with changes/interpretations on small scale but that is something which was not countered before in religious laws. There cannot be changes to previous established laws and that is what I am arguing.

[Pygoscelis]

(meanwhile, Muslim lands were full of scientific and mathematical advances, were protecting and gathering books etc).

This is actually true and is a good example of how religions change over time. During the Christian dark ages Islamic lands were actually open minded and pro-science and made many advances back then. So what happened? Islam entered a dark age of its own, from which it has arguably never recovered.

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Islam hasn't entered the dark ages, Muslims have.

[alcurad]

But Islam those times wasnt more peaceful, if it was, it might have remained in Arabia.

and the Byzantines & Persians were doing what on Arab-and Berber, Egyptian and many other people's- lands in the first place? The Arabs more or less fought the European's out of the entirety of North Africa, as well as Palestine and Syria, same goes for Persians, but then again yes, there were many instances when the rules and principles of Islam weren't followed. but it's not so black and white.

on topic: modernizing is really a subjective term, there's too much tension and negativity directed at anything the religious castes dub modernist/secular etc, however there is no clear criteria for this dubbing, rather it seems 'enemies of the state' as well as anyone who threatens certain sectarian/mathhabi assumptions is simply called that.

Islam weathered all the previous centuries, and so could it now, regardless of this modernist threat, ie. don't blow this out of proportion, most of our current day scholars are actually doing more damage than those modernizing seculars whom the majority doesn't even listen to in the first place, otherwise why are we in the mess we are in now? there were no modernist threats in work since the time of the prophet, or were there?

[Muezzin]

This is actually true and is a good example of how religions change over time. During the Christian dark ages Islamic lands were actually open minded and pro-science and made many advances back then. So what happened? Islam entered a dark age of its own, from which it has arguably never recovered.

It's certain Muslims who are to blame rather than Islam as a religion, which teaches us to explore Allah's creation (i.e. it encourages scientific advance). We have to pull our socks up, to put it lightly.

EDIT: This is not at all to devalue the contribution of the many Muslim doctors and scientists worldwide. Nothing worth accomplishing is easy. The problem is as a whole, Muslims unfortunately tend not to be that interested in science, and in some cases blindly rebel against it even when it does not conflict with Islam. And the reason for this is because those particular people haven't learned Islam properly. And the reason for that is we haven't taught Islam properly...

[TrueStranger]

Salaam Aliakum

I am personally against anyone who wants to change the sunnah of the Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) and try to change the interpretation of the Quran, and I am equally against anyone who would use the sunnah of Mohamed (PBUH) and the Quran to fulfill their own evil goals, and yes there are Muslims who do that toady.

Why is it that Muslims are not outraged about the Muslim on Muslim violence, the dictators, the injustices committed against Muslims in Muslims nations by Muslims. Those who say they are fighting for Muslims and Islam but are actually harming and inflicting major destruction on their fellow Muslims, those who will call his Muslim brother that prayers five times a day a kafir, and easily shed his blood.

Walalahi this causes me more distress than a kafir killing a Muslim. There is nothing more sad than Muslims who are willing to kill Muslims, and have no regard for the lives of innocent women and children.

There are millions of Muslims around the world that are suffering because of other Muslims.

[alcurad]

^but the current -mis?-interpretations of the qur'an and more specifically sunnah are part of the problem, no? I mean our dictators are also supported by religious establishments, and Muslim on Muslim violence is usually 'justified' as per Islam according to at least one side..