Yea and that's the thing about the Koran on many issues. It really is vague or downright silent on a lot of issues that have become controversial. For example, on the issue of pre-marital sex, the Koran says the least on this subject in comparison to the Bible and Jewish religious texts, yet in many ways they're the most fervent about the issue. Much of the attitudes of the Islamic world are shaped in part from cultural environments and surroundings that really have nothing to do with the Koran. Many governments in the Islamic world today are reactionary and radical governments that took control during a time of unrest and uncertainty following the turmoil of the world wars and Ottoman and European occupation. Conservative breeds of Islam really started to become much more influential and powerful and still remain so. As a result, many conservative practices not explicity dicated by the Koran have been implemented because of this.
But at the same time you have to look at hadith and sayings of the prophet (pbuh) as teachings as well as the quran. Idoltry was very rampant in the times of pagan arabia, and it was one of the main problems in that area. Islam forbid all idoltry and even former followers of prophets(jesus, moses, etc) had turned into idolterers. To stay away from such actions is one of the reasons why putting a face to the prophet is wrong in many muslims opinion.
I dont agree with you, mainly because what the quran seems to be silent or not clear on has been explained by the prophet and recorded in books such as bukhari, tirmidi, dawood. etc etc. All regarded as sayings of the prophet pbuh. Muslims believe an order from the prophet to be set in stone just like an order from the quran. Many of the attitudes DO get affected by culture, and surroundings, and some of them are like honor killings, and nationalism so high that people are willing to die for it. Conservative practices are not neccessarily a bad thing, especially not the way you make it seem. Yes many things may seem backwards, but if its true what they say, history repeats itself, then the teachings that worked back then should apply even today.
Well I havent read any of the texts beyond the quran and its been years since I even read that, so my knowledge of it is still extremely limited. Obviously I havent read anything beyond that, so I'll assume you're correct on this issue since you have more experience and knowledge in this realm. However, as pointed out above, Islam has changed so substantially from when it was originally practiced, despite having the same Quran. Cultural attitudes have influenced interpretations of the Quran. Additionally, the Quran is written in a manner that in some ways is more vague than either the Bible or other similar Jewish texts. Another example is the fact that NO WHERE in Islam are women prohibited from working. Yet in Saudi Arabia until recently, women were prohibited from working. The point is that Islam has been altered more by culture than the actual word of the Quran. Mohammed's words may be the truth but today's Islam is in many ways based on competing interpretations that are rooted in culture of an area. For example, Oman practices Ibadhi Islam which is unique to the country and is rooted in the traditional culture of the region. If you go to China and see the Islamic population of the Northeast, they practice a version of Islam that barely resembles anything in the Middle East. However, unlike Christianity which has splinter religions left and right, almost all of these groups tend to declare themselves as part of the Sunni/Shi'ite dichotomy. Hell, take the Sharia for example. It's based on the Quran and some of Mohammed's other teachings but Islamic scholars are allowed to alter the Sharia based on a consensus of these scholars. And parts of the Sharia have been created in this manner.
Feel free to reread my post, I say nothing about people not being able to stand muslims, it is the faith that they blindly follow that they can't stand. There are plenty of people what can't stand or understand the Christian or Jewish faiths, does that make them bigots? No. The bottom line is hundreds of thousands of muslims around the world overreact about incidents that occur and they've done it for CENTURIES and are still doing it today! Also, the churches that are being burned are NOT only black churches, so please don't bring up black churches being burned in the 60s to compare to th idiocy of these cartoon rampages. The US and Christians aren't perfect but last I checked no riots where hundreds have been killed have taken place in America or Christian faiths for years and years and years. Hello Apple, I'd like you to meet orange. Most non-muslims can't comprehend the actions of millions in the muslim faith, and while I know that many if not most American muslims aren't violent but I also know many if not most don't openly condemn the acts of fellow muslims that they KNOW to be wrong. The bottom line is you are guilty by association and even guiltier by association when you don't speak out LOUDLY against these idiotic actions. Once again I'd like to bring up how Christians from across the globe usually stand up when an idiot that calls himself Christian says or does something stupid (see abortion bombers or radical Christian "leaders"). I'd have a lot more respect for Muslims if they would openly condemn idiotic violence or hatred speak by their fellow muslims... but on a whole they simply shy away from the issue so as not to offend their fellow muslims.
can you please cite me examples of such incidents that have occured over the centuries in the muslim world? and since 'centuries' was capitalized i'd presume its more than two or three centuries but in fact maybe 8-9. i'd like examples. im so sick and tired of people delegating this debate to some weird people who have been doing this for 'thousands of years'. its stupid. its not true. all these problems started with colonialism and basically napolean going into egypt. before that the middle east didn't care about europe enough to hate it. its not even revisionist history. its just outright idiocy.
Because, in general, they're just as afraid of the fanatics as anybody else. And given that they live in the same communities, they may have more to fear. It's not like the fanatics have shown any qualms about killing fellow Muslims. Why were there no moderate, "peace w/ Israel" candidates in the Palestinian elections? Because anyone publicly campaigning for such a position would have been shot dead in the street. Good anecdote from Rod Dreher: It's a day or two after the 9/11 attacks, and I find myself sitting in a room in Brooklyn talking with about eight young Arab adults. All are Arab Christians, and all are worried that they will be mistaken for Muslims by outraged Americans, and suffer physical assault in the anti-Muslim backlash everybody was sure was coming (but which, in the end, didn't, thank God). All these Arabs in front of me are telling me that they live in a predominantly Muslim part of Brooklyn, and their Muslim neighbors are great guys, just the best. I ask them if these Muslim neighbors support terrorism. Well, yes, they say, and give examples of things they'd heard the Muslim neighbors say. But really, they insist, you have to realize that these are good people. Later, I wrap up the interview, and tell them I will be sure to quote their defense of their Muslim neighbors, despite the fact that these neighbors have in the past voiced support for terrorism. Suddenly, the Arab Christians' eyes get wide, and they all insist that I can't quote them. Please, they say, don't do it. Why not? I ask. Because they'll hurt us, they say. All agree that to publicly criticize anything about their Islamic neighbors would open them up to physical assault. The only one who agreed to be quoted was a Maronite who had fought in a sectarian militia prior to emigrating to the US -- and even he was nervous. "That's really interesting," I say. "You've all been telling me that we have nothing to worry about from your Muslim neighbors, but you won't allow yourself to be quoted saying that in the same article in which you say you've heard them make remarks supporting terrorism -- because you are afraid you will be physically injured. What does that tell us?" Silence. http://dallasmorningviews.beloblog.com/ There's countless other stories from all corners of the world illustrating the same fears.
I have to admit that I meant to put "DECADES", however since the founding of Islam in the 7th century there has been nothing but conflict... For over a millennium Islam had the world's strongest military, and they slowly conquered nation after nation and spread their message... and as you said not until the rise of Napoleon did Muslims even become challenged by "the West"... even during the Christian crusades Muslims dealt their share of violence. In the early 20th century "radical Islam" was born and the first big radical organization soon followed with the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt... and ever since then you've had millions of radical muslims take up the Jihad warflag against all things "westernized"... however Islam's "amused disdain" for the west's inferior culture and religion started as far back as the 16th century so please don't tell me that this is all new. All religions have their violent histories but while most have moved past them. I'll admit that up until the mid 20th century Christians and Jews still had their shares of problems but for the most part they've moved past that and have become more civilized and I wish I could say the same for a good number in the nation of Islam. Until millions of civilized muslims stand together against their radical brothers there is always going to be conflict, misunderstanding and confusion with the western world.
Loved it, then watched a special on the history channel callled Crescent and Cross, which was about the same thing. Did not realize that Kingdom of Heaven was based on history. Good movie. DD
I enjoyed it as well. I'm a sucker for any halfway decent historical fiction, whether in print, or on the big screen. Kingdom of Heaven was far better than decent. A pity that it wasn't marketed very well, and didn't do that great at the box office. Anyone know if there's a director's cut out on DVD? It seemed like it had some scenes cut, when I was watching it.
I guess I'm in the minority but I thought Kingdom of Heaven was bland and a waste of time. Maybe I should watch it again when it comes on TV so I'm not upset at paying for it.
Agree, it was very good, excellent acting/production, I was rather impressed. I will be watching it again when it's out on DVD, would love to see the "behind the scenes" stuff and the director's cut.
Luckily for you, it's already out: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...18-8083866?_encoding=UTF8,UTF8&v=glance&n=130 # DVD Features: * Available Subtitles: English, Spanish * Available Audio Tracks: English (DTS 5.1), English (Dolby Digital 5.1), Spanish (Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround), French (Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround) * The Pilgrim's Guide - A text commentary stream consisting of both production and historical notes, synchronous with film * Interactive Production Grid - A simple to use navigation portal will ask viewers to choose the desired perspective and timeframe allowing them to tailor the "Making Of" material to their liking. There are no less than 16 different ways to experience The Grid. (approx 125 minutes) * A&E's "Movie Real: Kingdom of Heaven" (approx 45 min) * The History Chanel's "History vs Hollywood: Kingdom of Heaven" (approx 48 min) * Behind-the-scenes featurettes: Ridley Scott - "Creating Worlds", Production Featurette, Wardrobe Featurette * Theatrical trailer
the dts audio is good. i also liked troy, though part of me thinks that wasn't based on real history!
