Abdul-Rahman, many thanks for your posting. I was wondering how you had become so thoughtful and knowledgeable about Islam. Muslim chaplain at San Quentin! That must have been fascinating, given the different strains of Islam that you must have encountered, to say nothing of the outlier Nation of Islam folks.
I don't have time to comment on your observations here, unfortunately as I am working on a couple of deadlines. Just one item: of the three Middle Eastern monotheistic religions, my understanding is that only Christianity (with the exception of Unitarians) fell into the trinity idea in an effort to elevate Jesus to divine status. Muslims hold Jesus one of the most important prophets, along with Moses, Abraham, and Muhammad, Muhammad standing out as the transmitter of the very word of God in the form of the Quran. Besides this, Muslims view Muhammad as a mere man with no divine status. Does Jojo operate with maliciousness? His aggressive and anti-collegial style may suggest that but this may be no more than the choices of someone who truly believes he has been told the truth and is shaken up upon finding that so many smart, well-informed people don't "get it." Who knows.... Resorting to insult is what people do when they can do nothing else. There may be more reason for empathetic sadness than anger.... On Dec 23, 2012, at 12:04 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > Thanks to Lawrence. I should mention that my opinons about Islam are my own. > I was internationally known as a writer on Islam well before 2000. I accepted > Islam in 1971, but I wouldn't say that, at that point, I understood it very > well. I was Muslim Chaplain at San Quentin State Prison, having volunteered > there for quite a few years, but that was only a temporary appointment, while > the regular chaplain was on vacation. While I do know a great deal about the > sources of Islam, and my perspectives on Islam are recognized as of interest > by genuine Muslim scholars, those who deeply know the source materials, I am > not a "Muslim scholar." My expertise on Islam is relative. > > As a writer on Islam, I engaged in on-line debate and discussion, and becamse > a moderator of the Usenet newsgroup soc.religion.islam, and we welcomed > people from all faiths, and atheists or agnostics, to participate. Gross > incivility was not tolerated, but discussion of such matters as the alleged > pedophilia of the Prophet were on-topic and there were many. I came to know > and consider as personal friends certain well-known Christian apologists, who > actually became knowledgeable about Islam, unlike certain fanatics, who only > know what they hate, which is actually themselves, because what they hate is > what they have invented -- for the most part. > > "Islam" is a term that has many levels of meaning, and one of the meanings is > the extant and popular world religion *as it is.* We can use the term > "Christianity" in the same way, and then we have lots of mud to toss, since > people are people. If I were inclined to attack Christianity (which would be > contrary to the Qur'an), I'd claim that Christianity is particularly > vulnerable to abuse, because, supposedly, Christians believe that *it doesn't > matter what they do, all they have to do is "believe in Jesus" and they are > safe. Never mind that Jesus himself, it's reported in the Gospel, denied > this. You can say the name and still end up rejected and denied by him. > > It's not about names, it's about faith, and a sign of faith would be light in > the heart. I know Christians who have that light. It's not about what words > we use, but what we *are*. > > Jojo lies. That's the truth. > > Lawrence, you said that Jojo doesn't do what he does maliciously. Yes, he > does, and he's acknowledged that. He's announced his intentions, clearly. I > covered that in prior posts. He might start with something sincere, but when > he perceives a response as insulting, he is going to *insult back*, and so > strongly that it will *force* others to back off. > > What's an "insult." Jojo has insisted that his ravings are not insults, they > are simply the truth. So the truth is not an insult. Okay, let's accept that > for a moment, though we'd have to be careful. > > If the truth is not an insult, then, if one is insulting back, it's not the > truth. It's something exaggerated or careless or even plain wrong, but that > one thinks will outrage, it's "fighting words." It's not the truth, but he > claims it is. Another lie. He actually knows better. > > Now, maybe he's truly insane. That's possible. If he's truly insane, he may > not be functioning well eough to distinguish between truth and falsehood. The > truth, here, has been in front of him, and now I'm talking about easily > disciminable truth, like what happened on this list. The list archive is > accessible. It can be reviewed. But Jojo may know that most people will not > check, they will just believe what they choose to believe. > > When I've made claims about Jojo's behavior, I have frequently backed it up > with actual citations, links, evidence. He doesn't do that. He just repeats > claims that are blatantly false. And is either so blatantly out of control > that he cannot keep his promises, or he liest about his intentions as well. > > He does not respond to evidence with evidence, he responds to evidence by > just repeating claims, or making new claims about evidence, such as his > claims that I'm relying on Wikipedia as if it were reliable. No, I'm relying > on Wikipedia to judge notability and as an independent review of a field. > Where an article has many editors, it can do that. > > For example, from the Wikipedia article on cold fusion, we can tell that many > still believe cold fusion is bogus. However, if you search the Wikipedia > article for *recent sources* that show that this is still a scientific > consensus, you won't find them. You will find old sources, weak sources, and > you will also find, if you look carefully at the article and it's history, > you can see that recent sources from mainstream journals have been largely > suppressed. The cold fusion article is a battleground article. The article on > Allah as Moon-God is not. As such, it may contain material that violates > Wikipedia guidelines, but *not seriously.* The article has received some > level of administrative attention, from an admin who does not appear to have > an axe to grind. There is a banned editor who contributed to the article, but > he was banned for other behavior, and he was strongly against the Moon-God > idea, his edits -- excessively -- debunked it. The creator of the article > seems to have generally favored the idea, but not as a fanatic. He's not > banned, it looks like he simply lost interest. > > I pointed to the Wikipedia article because it is a place to find evidence on > the issue, i.e., cited reports. Whatever is in the article that is not backed > with verifiable evidence from "reliable sources," which can include sources > that in a battleground article would never be allowed, won't last. The > neutral editors, who rather quickly recognize such stuff, will, long-term, > take it out. Wikipedia is easy to find. Trackig down all the sources is not > so easy. Jojo claims that it's easy to find what he claims. He's then claimed > that one must go to a library. That's a contradiction! The fact is that his > sources are obscure, mostly. They aren't on-line, it is not easy to find > them. But there is material in the article from people who have, indeed, read > them. > > I'm not necessarily citing sources any more. It's a waste of time, but if > anyone doubts that I'm telling the truth about Jojo's behavior, ask me. I > won't be insulted. I'll respond. Except I reserve the right not to respond to > obvious trolling, as from Jojo himself, or, say, "Orgasm Wikipedia." > > Jojo also writes incoherently. Below, he talks about knowing "more about > Islam" than "many so-called islam experts," and then he makes it clear that > he's not talking about "many experts," because he narrows it to me, because > he's made that "physics expert" claim about me. > > I have never claimed to be an expert on physics. There are people on this > list, a significant number, who know more about physics than I. What I've > "claimed" is just the truth. I was present for the Feynman lectures on > physics, and I know the years involved without looking it up, because those > were my freshman and sophomore years at Caltech, i.e., 1961-1962 and > 1962-1963. I did not graduate, and, specifically, I took no more physics > courses. Ever. I had originally intended to major in nuclear physics, and > studied it from before I was in high school. But my interests shifted, and > ultimately shifted entirely outside of academia. Yet I never forgot Feynman's > approach, and Feynman visited my residence house (Page), and told us his > famous stories. I identified with him then, and still do, my life has been > like his in certain ways. > > But I'm not a physicist. I just know some physicists, and I know enough > physics to recognize some BS, but not all. I can read Hagelstein and > understand him. Takahashi, it took me years to figure out what he's saying so > that I could explain it to others, and he's confirmed that I got it right. > That's actually my role in the field. I'm an interpreter. > > Below, Jojo claims this would be his last reply. He lied, as any who has a > list archive can see. (Specifically, he replied re Islam again, with his post > of Sun, 23 Dec 2012 13:51:48 +0800.) > > Is Islam a "peaceful religion"? That depends on what one means by "peaceful." > It also depends on what one means by "Islam." Normative Islam is both > peaceful and strong, i.e., "oppression is worse than killing." Yet, in > describing response to aggression, the Qur'an also says that retaliation is > acceptable, but "do not go beyond limits." The Old Testament rule of lex > talonis is repeated by the Qur'an, but then, again, it's clear that "two eyes > for an eye" is forbidden, that lex talonis is a *protection and a mercy*, > i.e., it is a limit, not a command to retailiate, and the verse goes on to > say that forgiveness is better, but forgiveness with justice (i.e., > compensation, according to "ma'ruwf," i.e., custom and community law). In > other words, the modern position. The Qur'anic Islam, then, revealed in a > tribal setting -- so tribal law is recognized and accepted -- foreshadows and > anticipates a much broader civil law, and helped to create that. > > However, if "Islam" is the reality of all those who call themselves "Muslim," > it's basically the same as any other religion. If I judge by the worst of > these people, and what they have done, I'd want to reject it all. > > Jojo, I don't doubt, may have done research, but when we do research looking > to find what will confirm what we believe, and if we believe something > fringe, yes, we may have to do serious research, looking for obscure sources. > A real scholar would, in reporting this research, then cite the sources, > knowing that it was fringe, and would acknowledge that, and explain why it's > fringe. The scholar would do this whether or not the scholar believes the > fringe position. Jojo, to the contrary, claims that "anyone who researches > this will recognize that he's telling the truth." Look at the first statement > below. He "can't convince" if we "don't do our own research." But that > presumes that anyone who researches what he claims will be convinced, and > that must mean that the sources needed, that would presumably overwhelm *all > other scholarship*, are easy to find. Given how many people believe the Moon > God trope, why aren't those sources available on-line, for easy citation? > Jojo doesn't even give *any* of them. He doesn't mention the names of > authors, nor of works. > > That allows him to get away with claiming whatever he wants. And if one tries > to verify it, and comes up empty, he simply claims that one didn't try hard > enough. > > Yes, I found "sources." Such as a Christian evangelist comic-book. That > simply states the claims without evidence. Oh, there are some books you can > buy. If you belong to a certain kind of church, they might have then in the > church library. Hey, if you want to find out the truth about Islam, join a > church and read what they have in their library, and you can be as "informed" > as Jojo! > > On-line, though, you can find > http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm > Bold face from that page: "The reader must know that Islam, Judaism, and > organized Christianity (so-called) all worship a trinity of gods." > I.e., everyone is astray but us. That's the definition of a sect, in the > Qur'an. (And, yes, any "Muslim" who thinks like that is sectarian. The Qur'an > is a message *to Muslims* and it is not a collection of arguments to hurl at > others, it's a reminder and a warning, that is exactly how it describes > itself.) > > http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-moon-god-allah.htm > > One of the sources cited on the above page has a page of quotes cited there. > The source is "The Archaeology of World Religions." The page of quotes is at > http://www.bible.ca/islam/library/islam-quotes-finegan.htm > > The claims of the site are not supported by those quotes, except as material > is taken out of context and used to claim what is not supported there. There > is no scholarship here, on the "bible.ca" page, it's polemic, where alleged > fact is strung together to lead to a desired conclusion, regardless of > balance. The encyclopedia itself, as quoted, seems like a work of > scholarship, with what I can recognize as personal opinion of the author > plays only a minor role. He does speculate in line with his own opinion, but > seems also to be careful to signify this with "it seems," or language like > that, speculating about the *motives* of the Prophet. There is a lost > reference there, "it seems" *to whom*? To him, obviously. And that might be a > shared opinion, but the speculation is also clearly that of a non-Muslim, who > believes that Muhammad made up the Qur'an for a purpose (a somewhat noble > one, by the way, the scholar is not attacking Islam, merely identifying > himself as non-Muslim in the traditional sense.) > > Jojo made a claim about a pilot and copilot who were allegedly murdered by > pilgrims incensed by a flight delay. That story was told as some kind of > alleged evidence as to the violent tendencies of "Muslims." He gave no > specifics, but I searched, and eventually I found a story that was close > enough to his that it might have been the origin of his claim. But crucial > details were quite different from what he confidently asserted as fact, and > those details make the story completely suspect as to being anything like > what he wants to make uot of it. So I can't be sure that there isn't some > *other* story that would be a closer match. I kept looking. I didn't find it. > Now, I could go to a library, but what would I look for? This is the kind of > search that any present scholar would do on-line, unless they happen to have > access to certain specific databases. > > I cited my result, linking to stories about it. The most reputable of the > sources was the Guardian. > http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/feb/15/afghanistan2 > > I did not find follow-up on this, but if the story in the Guardian is > covering the incident Jojo wrote about (as being "a true story that you can > research also," his facts were severely distorted, Jojo got the facts > radically wrong, in the way that happens with someone who believes unverified > rumors, because they confirm preconceptions. The pilot and copilot were not > killed, nor even harmed, though the story is not completely clear. The man > killed was an Afghan government minister, and the Guardian reports government > claims that this was not a mob killing, though there may have been a attempt > to make it so, it was (allegedly), a political assassination. Kabul, > Afghanistan, 2002. Messy place. A war going on. Etc. Early reports claimed > that two women had died from exposure to cold, waiting for a flight for days. > That could be the fog of rumor, but if there really was a mob attack, as > such, there may have been more at stake than a mere ordinary flight delay. > Jojo's story says nothing about Islam (which prohibits "mob justice"). As I > mentioned, fighting of any kind is expressly prohibited during the > pilgrimage, which would include any waiting at the airport. But this is not a > story about Islam, as such, it's a story about people. Yes, a group of > pilgrims might be expected to have a greater knowledge about Islam than the > average Muslim, but "it ain't necessarily so." > > Jojo is not about to make his story verifiable, I strongly suspect. He is not > about to correct his errors, or to point to the real event, if it's > different. No, he's done his work by making the outrageous claim. He knows > that what he's written is not true, but he does not correct it, because his > intenion was not truth, it was insult. He's trolling. And that is just about > all he cares about. > > He certainly does not care about reaching Muslims with the truth, like my > Christian friends were. His approach to Muslims would either leave them > bewildered, at his ignorance, or, yes, for a few, angry. But nobody is going > to call for a "fatwa against him," suggesting he should be killed for > "insulting Islam." Nobody here has even remotely approached that. I'm, to my > knowledge, the only declared Muslim participating here, and I've not even > called for him to be banned. I've suggested that the list owner might warn > him, that's the extent of it. > > Jojo doesn't recognize what's in front of his face, much less what is out in > the world about a subject as complex as Islam, or anything else that he raves > about. > > > At 10:15 PM 12/22/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: >> Hey, I can't convince you if you don't do your own research. >> >> Everything I've said so far is the truth; and even muslim scholars >> acknowledge it. But if you rely on Wikipedia (stable or not) then you only >> have yourself to blame. >> >> You know, even in college, even before the Jihad aginst the "Great Satan" of >> 2001, I already knew more about Islam than many so called islam experts (who >> also claim to be physics expert but did not graduate.) My friends, I have >> done my research in real libraries, not wikipedia and the Internet blogs and >> "politically correct" opinion news we find today. I did my research the >> real way people do research; thru hard work and long hours of fact finding; >> not simply regurgitating wikipedia. LOL ... >> >> If you want to be convinced by deception that islam is a "peaceful" >> religion, it's your right to be stupid. A simple research effort will >> reveal that I am speaking the truth about islam. >> >> This is the last reply I will make regarding the matter. You have a right >> to be deceived if you want. >> >> >> Jojo >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "de Bivort Lawrence" <ldebiv...@gmail.com> >> To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2012 3:29 AM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age >> >> >> Essentially, all that Jojo has written about Islam is flat-out incorrect. >> Lomax did a great job explaining and providing sources for the reality. >> >> I don't believe that Joho is doing so maliciously: he is, I believe, merely >> repeating misinformation that he has picked up elsewhere. Alas, given the >> current levels of Islamophobia he has plenty to choose from. I also believe >> that Jojo is not interested in genuine discussion or education on this >> matter, and so have merely pointed out for the benefit of anyone else >> interested here that his posts on Islam are deeply mistaken. >> >> If anyone on this list is interested in Islam, I'll be happy to discuss >> further, perhaps off-list. >> >> Cheers, >> Lawry >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Dec 22, 2012, at 10:58 AM, Harvey Norris <harv...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> Are all muslims preoccupied with obsessions? Someone told me they have >>> animal sex and it is advocated in the Koran. Could this be like a virus >>> from (that activity) and a medical condition causing undue speculation as a >>> mental syndrome. Does it make muslims to be insulted or mad to suggest >>> this? I assume that the freedom of information act is allowed with OT >>> posts, but if it aint I will cease and desist, but my opinion is just the >>> whole subject is obsessional or just plain stupid. HDN >>> Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances >>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ >>> >> >
