Opinion piece on liberal Islam

Hi fromelsewhere,

As you have said, 'an opinion piece', well you have got one opinion. I would believe it would be in the same vein as other opinions, males and females (but then again it is just my belief).

My opinion is quite simple. But before we go there, there are some matters I need to address because you're an agnostic. The simple chain would be do you believe or don't you. To believe you will have your own reasons and just like to disbelieve. You cannot understand islam and the Quran in the same way as you would other faiths because the message is there for all to see, unchanged although the practice may vary slightly.

The question for believers is simple. Will you follow Allah's commands? Like one of the 5 pillars of islam, performing the Hajj. Once done, it is crossed off the list. Do you have to do it every year or all other questions become irrelevant. There is no reason to change it except that we become like Satan where we challenge Allah and change His instruction from the examples of the messenger (pbuh) but now we allow non muslims to decide how we should open our doors?

I think that is a rather presumptuous course of action (guised in goodwill). Islam is not a matter of opinion. We never made the law, we just have to observe it. We have to submit to the ultimate wisdom of Allah. He knows, we don't.

These kinds of in the guise of 'liberal' it actually is a spin off like that of believers of Jesus ending up following Paul.

I don't understand why it is so important for people to change islam? Why are they threatened by muslims? What has the muslims really done to the world at large?

What you say about going to heaven or hell, really, that no one knows. That is all in the Hands of the Almighty. It is with His Mercy that we get to heaven. So to gain His mercy, do we submit to His command or not? Or change it because we have our own opinion? If we did that, where did we submit? It means we have not submitted. It means we have altered. It may prove that we have not gained His mercy for that, what is our recourse when we have to face judgment? None! We knew the practice, it was done pretty much unchanged for 1400 odd years, and here comes some group of 'well wisher' imposing a dramatic change to part of the main item of the 5 pillars, going ahead despite receiving worldwide protest is pure arrogance, I believe. It is like everything else islam has to deal with, all the 'in your face' actions and the 'we will do it anyway and what are you going to do about it?!' from the publishing of the prophet Muhammad's caricature (that was outright rude and insensitive, knowing the muslim beliefs when they could find plenty other subjects to do without needing to incite any possible reaction) and other outright anti islam actions.

What islam does not need is outside intervention. A muslim, through his belief in Allah, and via following the messenger (pbuh) has a pathway to heaven. How he gets there will depend on his relationship with Allah and executing commandments. If we have deviated from the ways of the prophet, then is just academic. Even less guarantee of reward, if any. Why do it except to mislead to people?

You know how people are all against extremists?? Well, "liberal" muslims are extremists on a different side of the spectrum. The people who have created this "mosque" (which it isn't really) basically desecrate the areas where they pray. They have made up their own rules from their whims and desires, and that's all fine and dandy, but don't call it Islam because this is a very watered down and twisted version. They knew it would offend Muslims, but they didn't care lol. Just as I'd be totally against ISIS for their views, I'm equally against these liberal muslims for theirs. One physically harms and the other spiritually damages, both are brainwashed, and neither should be connected with Islam. You are free to practice whatever you want, but don't connect it with my religion. Just because you aren't harming me physically doesn't mean it's not offensive or a mockery of the real thing.

A Masjid that does not go by the Shariah is not a Masjid. A Masjid with the intention of trying to oppose real Islam / segregation rules, is NOT based on piety but conscious disobedience. I'd never ever enter such a masjid. And all Muslims should stand against this - to show this has no place in Islam.

There are both extremes, as sister Charisma said. This being the other end of the extremes.

THe one's who has made this masjid are fasiqs, and it is obvious they are trying to change Islam, though futile. Because it can not be changed because Allah protects it. And there will always be people upon the Truth.

And Allah knows best.

format_quote Originally Posted by DanEdge

But I disagree that "Islam is not a matter of opinion." We see a lot of disagreement in the Muslim world about how Islam is to be interpreted. Each group thinks their interpretation is superior. Some of those groups endorse violence, and that's why many feel threatened.

This is a very fair comment. You are reading ha ha ha

In a nut shell the answer would be islam is perfect, the muslims are not! Ha ha ha..... ok, let's go back one step still.. Why would there be those situations of having a 'more' important opinion? It is the intention of 'power', of having it. To divide and conquer, to incite hatred amongst clans to cause division and to keep them off balance by having them pre-occupied with their own petty squabbles that they don't threaten your position. ..mmm maybe that did not answer it as I might like to say it, to give another example would be to use prophet Abraham as an example when he stunned the entire village by his answers upon their discovery of all broken idols except one, (Baal I think it is) when he cornered them and they knew he was right! They all could have turned into believers at that point but it took only one person to shout "Lynch him!" (kind of thing) and the moment has passed. Unfortunately, in any muslim societies, there will be a band of these "Lynch him!' bunch that would not want to find a way of settling differences but to make those differences pronounced.

Yes, they feel threatened when the wield of influence reduces... these are people who have gotten drunk of their earthly positions.. If they are not, they would rather unite 2 forces and relinquish responsibility.

When we go into the area of how is islam to be interpreted, that is errr not a real topic unless we specify which areas are we talking about because it is a way of life so it governs every aspect. Hence I said about our relationship with Allah, never talking about the environment (meaning politics or whatever external stuff) as I would believe in what is good with reason. Those differences people talk about do not really play an integral part of our everyday lives and is mainly academic. Others are a result of years of infused traditions, perhaps.

Once presidency (khilaafah) on the method of prophethood ('alaa manhaj an-Nubuwwah) in submission and obedience to Allah (Islam) with united Muslim states is fully established, inshaAllah, we will have representative shura councils in all localities, and the leaders considered as most wise elected by those councils will have a position on the more centralized councils, up until the shura council comprising of those chosen as the most wise from amongst the group below to work with the khaleefah (Islamic president) and come to a formal decision on matters of moment - that way there will be consensus and there will be no excuse for those who have become accustomed to drawing divisive national borders for Muslims and installing corrupt chiefs (who care more for their cut of the loot from the looters of their nation than they do for the people) will have no excuse to point fingers for the sake of contention.
Decisions will be made in justice seeking Allah's goodwill instead of the present anarchic global situation where secularist think tanks, dragon worshippers , and ngo's fund chaos through fake "Muslim conservative libertarians".
It is ironic that some people managed to turn a "republic" into a "liberal democracy" with elections run by usurious banks and media moguls dictated to by advertising companies - where "republicans" end up trying to install fake "liberal democracies"..... in illegally occupied lands......


Here's an example of how it's been waged of late:

.

As the U.S. Armed Forces were preparing for a confrontation with the Taliban in September 2001, Karzai began urging NATO states to purge his country of al-Qaeda. He told BBC "These Arabs, together with their foreign supporters and the Taliban, destroyed miles and miles of homes and orchards and vineyards... They have killed Afghans. They have trained their guns on Afghan lives... We want them out.".....

After 7 October 2001 launch of Operation Enduring Freedom, the United Front (Northern Alliance) worked with teams of U.S. special forces. Together, they overthrew the Taliban regime and mustered support for a new government in Afghanistan. Karzai and his group were in Quetta (Pakistan) at the time, where they began their covert operation.

On 4 November 2001, American special operation forces flew Karzai out of Afghanistan for protection.

On 5 December 2001, Hamid Karzai and his group of fighters survived a friendly fire missile attack by U.S. Air Force pilots in southern Afghanistan. The group suffered injuries and was treated in the United States; Karzai received injuries to his facial nerves, as can sometimes be noticed during his speeches.

In December 2001, political leaders gathered in Germany to agree on new leadership structures. Under 5 December Bonn Agreement, they formed an Interim Administration and named Karzai Chairman of a 29-member governing committee. He was sworn in as leader on 22 December.


When Karzai finally arrived in Kabul, in December 2001, he was installed at the helm of a government bankrolled by foreign money and staffed by officials he had not chosen. Under the Bonn agreement, brokered by the West, many key roles had gone to warlords in return for their cooperation with the United States. Karzai “never overcame the legacy of Bonn, where everyone else at his cabinet given to him had the same legitimacy as him,” says a longtime aide. “So he never really embraced the government as his, always mistrusted it.” Seventeen of the 30 cabinet members were Northern Alliance commanders, and those commanders also got a share of power at the local level, installing men who had served under them. Over one meal at his palace, Karzai asked General John Abizaid, the head of U.S. Central Command at the time, why America was supporting certain warlords who were causing his government trouble. “They are one of us, just like you are one of us,” Abizaid responded, in an attempt, he later said, to encourage political accommodation. Afghan forces allied with the American counterinsurgency mission are designated “green” by the U.S. military. “We are not going to be green on green,” Abizaid said.....

After Karzai was installed into power, his actual authority outside the capital city of Kabul was said to be so limited that he was often derided as the "Mayor of Kabul".
The situation was particularly delicate since Karzai and his administration have not been equipped either financially or politically to influence reforms outside of the region around Kabul. Other areas, particularly the more remote ones, have historically been under the influence of various local leaders.

In 2004, he rejected an international proposal to end poppy production in Afghanistan through aerial spraying of chemical herbicides, fearing that it would harm the economic situation of his countrymen.


Under Karzai's administration, electoral fraud was so apparent that Afghanistan's status as a democratic state came into question.[107][108] Furthermore, a special court set up personally by Karzai in defiance of constitutional norms sought to reinstate dozens of candidates who were removed for fraud in the 2010 parliamentary elections by the Independent Electoral Commission.[109]


.....One morning in February of this year, the bodies of 21 army soldiers, killed in the eastern province of Kunar, were brought to the military hospital in Kabul. Karzai used the incident as a pretext to cancel a trip abroad, but instead of attending the funerals, he remained in his palace, busily politicking. When I told him the public thought he was a leader who did not stand up for his soldiers, the president became defensive.

“But I do. I have done it very often. That’s Western propaganda,” he said, thumping his desk. “They are the sons of this soil, they are giving their life. But that life is gone in a war that’s not ours.”

On the same day he said those words, Karzai ordered the questioning of three of his brightest special-forces officers on vague charges of, among other things, spying for Western countries—an odd charge, considering they are equipped and advised by NATO.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

My view is that it doesn't matter how religious or irreligious people are, so long as people can respect one another and live side-by-side peacefully.

I have yet to meet a liberal who can respect traditional religious people and leave them alone to live according to their values. Liberalism is the worst cultural disease in the world, the disease that destroyed virtually every successful culture in history. Decent people should avoid liberalism and liberal religion like the plague. (Note, I am not Muslim and I used to be atheist.)