ISIL, Taliban = True Islam??

[mikkel_the_dane]

Still can't bring yourself to come down on one side of the fence.

As a matter of interest, do you make these demands of Muslims who cite hadith in praise or support of Allah, Muhammad, etc"
No, of course you don't.
Your intellectual dishonesty is as deep as it is obvious.

I am curious about something and you might be able to answer it. As a Scandinavian and still a culture Christian even as an atheist I wonder about this: Do you think Islam could evolve into something similar like some Christians in Scandinavia, namely they believe in some form of love and help other humans, but they understand in a modern form: Human rights, humanism, welfare state and a secular outlook, because God to them is that they go to Heaven when they die and that is it. I.e. they are not like dogmatic and fundamentalistic version of Christianity.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Seriously? You are dismissing the likes of Ibn Abbas and Ibn Kathir as inauthentic?

You've completely lost the plot now..

Are they suggesting that it is lawful to have sexual intercourse with a girl who hasn't reached puberty?
If so, please show me.

No. It is talking about how long a new husband must wait before having sex with a woman who is not a virgin.

What nonsense is this?
That verse is about divorce, and not "having sex".

If she hasn't had sex, why is there an iddah?

A good question. You are asking the wrong person. I don't follow these "scholars".

 

[muhammad_isa]

The passage is referring to women who have already been married. Therefore Allah would naturally use a term that denotes a married women. Hardly rocket science.

Yes, you are an intelligent individual.
It is a pity that you can't use it in a more positive way.

Somebody as intelligent as you should surely realise that it is us that determine the future with our decisions.
Do you believe that the future is an imaginary concept?
..or is it a real one?

i.e. will the future be represented by a series of events or not?

 

[firedragon]

Still can't bring yourself to come down on one side of the fence.

As a matter of interest, do you make these demands of Muslims who cite hadith in praise or support of Allah, Muhammad, etc"
No, of course you don't.
Your intellectual dishonesty is as deep as it is obvious.

So you dont know the answer to any of them.

 

[firedragon]

Yet more intellectual dishonesty or stupidity.
I clearly said... "In the context of Islamic belief".

It's baffling that you seem to think these tactics can, in any way, strengthen your position.

But you dont believe they are historical. But you quote "Muhammed did this and that".

And then you say in the context of Islamic belief, and when I ask you about Islamic belief, scholarship etc, all you have is some insults to get away from that you have no clue about that also.

Show your character. More insults. Or, address the questions asked.

So according to which scholar is this hadith authentic, and which scholar did not accept it at all, and which scholar said Its Sahih but not Sarih?

Who narrated this hadith, and what are the problems with the narrator?

Why is Muslim different to Bukhari?

Why is it not in the Golden chain?

What are other scholars saying about this hadith?

If you dont know, you can ask.

 

[firedragon]

He provided four examples explaining that the reference is to prepubertal girls.

But the text does not say it. It does not say prepubescent. It is an inference. In arabic, it is referring to grown women because it says ANNisaa. That means grown women. Little girls are never called Grown women.

Anyway, do you know the criteria for marital age in the Qur'an? After all, this is about the Qur'an so do you know?

 

[Azrael Antilla]

Maybe you should have read it properly then as there is no "anti-science" attack at the end.

If you think it is "anti-science" to point out that commonly held scientific beliefs have later turned out to be wrong then you probably aren't the best person to comment on what is or is not an "anti-science attack."



Hopefully you are aware that they were indeed deemed scientific at the time.

If not, read more.



Cool story. Nothing to do with anything I said, but thanks for sharing.

Again it helps to read posts before commenting on them so you don't end up arguing against figments of your imagination

Gibberish. Scientists in the 19th century believed all kinds of things. Doesn't mean they were scientifically accepted. Newton was into spiritualism, doesn't mean spiritualism was a science. No-one cares. Because spiritualism is nonsense. Social Darwinism was never a scientifically accepted theory. Whatever you laughably claim to the contrary.


Again i ask you. What was science wrong about precisely?

Either answer or do not respond to me.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

Yes, you are an intelligent individual.
It is a pity that you can't use it in a more positive way.

Somebody as intelligent as you should surely realise that it is us that determine the future with our decisions.
Do you believe that the future is an imaginary concept?
..or is it a real one?

i.e. will the future be represented by a series of events or not?

Ever heard of chaos theory?

 

[KWED]

Okay. So you are not an expert, but you know others are not as well. No worries, so does that mean you dont know whats the word for prepubescent girls? If you dont know its not a problem, just say so.

Why are you so obsessed with this particular word? What is the relevance? Is there even one?

Surely you aren't going to invoke the "If a specific word is not in the Quran then the Quran cannot be referring to anything to do with that word" argument. Because that collapses the whole "Quran exegesis" concept, and you are left with only literalist interpretations - which you seemed to oppose.
And whatever happened to the "But words in Arabic can mean all sorts of different things" argument?

 

[KWED]

Thats not the tafsir of Ibn Abbas. Dont read the website, get the actual tafsir.

Oh dear. You really are clutching at straws now.
I have the 2007 Al-Bayt edition. Which one do you have?
(Don't worry, I know you don't have a copy. If you had, you would have turned to page 675 and found the relevant passage)

Who said its irrelevant.

I did. Just then. Pay attention.

 

[KWED]

That is dependent whether they are a believer or not.
G-d tells us in the Qur'an that we should marry a believing woman.
It is her choice to believe that she should dress modestly.
When it comes to those that you are responsible for, it depends on their age.

When a woman is responsible for herself, and is no longer dependent on her parents, she can do what she please.
That doesn't stop a person giving her advise.

Right. So you think Muslim women should wear what they are told. Fair enough.
What about non-muslim women?

 

[KWED]

I am curious about something and you might be able to answer it. As a Scandinavian and still a culture Christian even as an atheist I wonder about this: Do you think Islam could evolve into something similar like some Christians in Scandinavia, namely they believe in some form of love and help other humans, but they understand in a modern form: Human rights, humanism, welfare state and a secular outlook, because God to them is that they go to Heaven when they die and that is it. I.e. they are not like dogmatic and fundamentalistic version of Christianity.

It's happening now. Look at Sufism. Look at Baha'i.
Hell, we even have our own resident revisionist in Brother Link who has invented a totally new version of Islam based on his own fevered imagination.

However, mainstream Sunni Islam will take some time to evolve into something less dogmatic because of the combination of infallibility of scripture and lack of a supreme authority to impose changes on the religion as a whole.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

No they didn't do the same. You conjecture exactly like Khawarij conjecture with "rule is only for God" to refute Imam Ali (a) can judge to his wisdom.

Leader is a word, it can be used for a soccer team leader. It can be used for community local leaders. Do you call Captains of soccer team usurpers of Imams (a)?

Simon (a) was not chosen by God, was a disciple of Isa (a) but he succeeded Isa's (a) social and political leadership while Elyas (a) was the witness and leader from God during that time.

Not really. They call Him the leader of the Muslims of the World. This leadership is different than ordinary Leadeship. Such a leadership is only for the chosen ones of God. It is claiming that he is representative of God. I saw many times the Mullas in Iran said this. They also call him representative of the Imam Mahdi. All of it is based on misapplication and misuse of the Quran and Hadith for one's own purpose. There is no such a thing in Quran as Islamic Republic Government. Such government is only for Imams and chosen ones of God. Also, no body chose Khamenei. There was no voting for people to choose him. So, all of it is dictatorship. And if it is said the assembly of experts chose him, that is not all people participating in election. Moreover, election must be repeated every 4 or 5 years. Who says, someone is to be a leader for lifetime? This idea is only for Imams who are chosen by God, not an ordinary person. So, it is a double standard. In practice he is as if he is an Imam.

 

[Link]

Not really. They call Him the leader of the Muslims of the World. This leadership is different than ordinary Leadeship. Such a leadership is only for the chosen ones of God. It is claiming that he is representative of God. I saw many times the Mullas in Iran said this. They also call him representative of the Imam Mahdi. All of it is based on misapplication and misuse of the Quran and Hadith for one's own purpose. There is no such a thing in Quran as Islamic Republic Government. Such government is only for Imams and chosen ones of God. Also, no body chose Khamenei. There was no voting for people to choose him. So, all of it is dictatorship. And if it is said the assembly of experts chose him, that is not all people participating in election. Moreover, election must be repeated every 4 or 5 years. Who says, someone is to be a leader for lifetime? This idea is only for Imams who are chosen by God, not an ordinary person. So, it is a double standard. In practice he is as if he is an Imam.

You don't know anything but your desires about Islam. So I'm going to stop it at that.

Keep wishing ill on believers, we will see on day of judgment who was dark or light hearted.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

You don't know anything but your desires about Islam. So I'm going to stop it at that.

Keep wishing ill on believers, we will see on day of judgment who was dark or light hearted.

Well, I was hoping we can have logical discussion on this. It is in a way related to the thread. All these so called Islamic Governments, such as ISIS, Taliban, Islamic Republic, have no true basis in the Quran and Hadith.
They took advantage of religion and came up with this to justify their government.
Most people now know this. Only those who somehow get paid by this system and have some benefits for them will support the idea of Welayat Faghih. Well, maybe a few who are not aware of Quran and Hadith to know that, all Hadithes tells us, Government is for the Mahdi. No one is supposed to arise, before Mahdi. And now this government idea from beginning was, to represent Mahdi, because He is absent!
If you want make a specific thread, but not a one on one thread.

 

[firedragon]

Oh dear. You really are clutching at straws now.
I have the 2007 Al-Bayt edition. Which one do you have?
(Don't worry, I know you don't have a copy. If you had, you would have turned to page 675 and found the relevant passage)

I did. Just then. Pay attention.

Mate. Thanks for the usual insults.

You are not reading the iBn Abbas Tafsir. you are reading the Thanweer of Al Mikbaas. its commentary on Tasfir. This is the problem with google scholarship ready to insult others. Its actually kind of hilarious. Nevermind. We all learn everyday.

Read properly.

 

[Link]

Well, I was hoping we can have logical discussion on this. It is in a way related to the thread. All these so called Islamic Governments, such as ISIS, Taliban, Islamic Republic, have no true basis in the Quran and Hadith.
They took advantage of religion and came up with this to justify their government.
Most people now know this. Only those who somehow get paid by this system and have some benefits for them will support the idea of Welayat Faghih. Well, maybe a few who are not aware of Quran and Hadith to know that, all Hadithes tells us, Government is for the Mahdi. No one is supposed to arise, before Mahdi. And now this government idea from beginning was, to represent Mahdi, because He is absent!
If you want make a specific thread, but not a one on one thread.

You ignore and repeat. So there's no talking sense to you. You ignored what I said about Simon (a) and Elyas (a) which proves everything. Simon (a) is a successor of Isa (a) when it comes to outward leadership while it was Elyas (a) who took the position of holy spirit and guide from God position of Isa (a) during time between Isa (a) and Mohammad (s). Both of these can be proven in Quran and hadiths.

You repeat the same thing. Soccer leaders and captains are also taking position of Imams (a) right? How dare they use that term.

Simon (a) is a disciple and volatile, he is not chosen by God, but rather Isa (a) trusted him and disciples trusted him.

 

[firedragon]

Why are you so obsessed with this particular word? What is the relevance? Is there even one?

Of course there is. If you dont know just say so.

Surely you aren't going to invoke the "If a specific word is not in the Quran then the Quran cannot be referring to anything to do with that word" argument. Because that collapses the whole "Quran exegesis" concept, and you are left with only literalist interpretations - which you seemed to oppose.
And whatever happened to the "But words in Arabic can mean all sorts of different things" argument?

Who made that argument? You just created it.

So again, what is the "Classical Arabic" word, which you said I dont know, for pre pubescent girls? Go ahead.

Since you dont know, just say you dont know.

 

[firedragon]

They took advantage of religion and came up with this to justify their government.

Please quote these ISIL, Taliban, and who ever you wish to demonise Islam with, directly. Quote them directly since you are making these claims.

 

[firedragon]

Not really. They call Him the leader of the Muslims of the World. This leadership is different than ordinary Leadeship. Such a leadership is only for the chosen ones of God. It is claiming that he is representative of God. I saw many times the Mullas in Iran said this. They also call him representative of the Imam Mahdi. All of it is based on misapplication and misuse of the Quran and Hadith for one's own purpose. There is no such a thing in Quran as Islamic Republic Government. Such government is only for Imams and chosen ones of God. Also, no body chose Khamenei. There was no voting for people to choose him. So, all of it is dictatorship. And if it is said the assembly of experts chose him, that is not all people participating in election. Moreover, election must be repeated every 4 or 5 years. Who says, someone is to be a leader for lifetime? This idea is only for Imams who are chosen by God, not an ordinary person. So, it is a double standard. In practice he is as if he is an Imam.

I think you have a political hatred towards Iran so you are trying your levels best to bring it in here to derail this thread.