Dear Ahmad,
Without meaning to offend you, do you really think we take removal of posts lightly here on this forum? If you are not aware of the discussions or investigations we have done, then why do you question it? We politely question you, have you been given the responsibility to moderate or do we have to publicly explain our decisions to you when it does not concern you? No one is forced to write on this forum and they do this by choice by acknowledging to go by by this forum's rules and not some others.
Now to your comment:
When I read it I found that it was logical and actually contained some truth. What if he is not advertising another's scholar opinion and its his opinion and he believes that its true. (Even if its similar to another scholar's opinion).
In the post that you refer to, Good Logic wrote:
"Many sectarian and religious titles have been invented by humans over the years.
It is ironic and unfortunate that such fake titles have been gradually taking part in human history and culture.
They have been endorsed by scholars and have become officially established in documentaries and text books for all generations."Now find the exact paragraph
here:
http://submission.org/friday_one_religion_many_titles.htmlAre these Good Logic's words or the indiscriminate verbatim use of material from the submitter's site
without references?
Another example from the same post, Good Logic wrote:
"This reminder is a straightforward acknowledgement of the only message and the only "deen" that is authorized and approved by GOD!?
Qoran recognizes many of the tribes and communities that received the guidance through different messengers and scriptures.
Those communities are given titles and/or descriptions in Qoran related to their prophets/ messengers, their geographical location or their genetic descent.
The titles of these different communities were not supposed to establish different unauthorized "deens" or sects as propagated and fed to the media and to the early and later human generations. "Now find the exact paragraph here:
http://submission.org/friday_one_religion_many_titles.htmlAre these Good Logic's words or the indiscriminate verbatim use of material from the submitter's site
without references?
In another post here:
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1325.msg6185#msg6185Good Logic wrote:
"Contrary to common belief, the "Original Sin" was not Adam's violation of God's law when he ate from the forbidden tree.
The original sin was our failure to uphold God's absolute authority during the Great Feud.
If the human person convinces his or her jinn companion to denounce that original sin, and uphold God's absolute authority, both creatures are redeemed to God's eternal kingdom on the Day of Judgment.
But if the jinn companion convinces the human being to uphold Satan's idolatrous views, then both creatures are exiled forever from God's kingdom. "This is word to word from
Rashad Khalifa's Appendix 7 below:
http://www.masjidtucson.org/quran/appendices/appendix7.htmlAre these Good Logic's words or the indiscriminate use of Rashad Khalifa's words from his appendices that are taken
without references and taken verbatim?In another post, Good Logic wrote:
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1325.msg6193#msg6193"Because our life in this world is a series of tests designed to expose our polytheistic ideas, idol worship is the only unforgivable offence (4:48, 4:116).
The world is divinely designed to manifest our decision to uphold either God's absolute authority, or Satan's idolatrous views (67:1-2). Only those who are totally certain about God's absolute authority are redeemed (26:89)." He then said:
"This is my understanding."Please see the exact paragraph word for word taken from
Rashad' Khalifa's Appendix 7 here:
http://submission.org/App7.htmlAre these Good Logic's words or the indiscriminate use of Rashad Khalifa's words from his appendices that are taken
without references and taken verbatim?We find such examples not throughout this one post, but in many of his posts and thus he was warned. Can we kindly ask you not to question the reasons why we have made a certain decision especially when you do not know the reasons behind our decision. What you have done is rather than leaving the matter private between the moderators and Good Logic, where we have given him the reasons why, your questioning has caused this to become more public.
Any indiscriminate use of
another's work especially verbatim and without references is
not academic or just. We need to ensure that a particular viewpoint is not being peddled indiscriminately on this forum and members make use of their own thoughts, in their own words and if they do cite verbatim, then they use citations / references.
This forum is not a place to just peddle a particular view regardless of the group. It is an opportunity for real meaningful discussions where all parties are open to learn from each other.
Thanks!
Show Posts
