Azrael Antilla
Active Member
It's why I am here. To hear other voices. Whether I listen. Depends.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
ISIL, Taliban = True Islam??
- Thread starter firedragon
- Start date
Azrael Antilla
Active Member
Same.
muhammad_isa
Well-Known Member
You said it .. not me.
I assume you understood my comments on the unconscious mind.
God knows us better than we know ourselves.
I might be a hypocrite .. but I like to think that I'm not.
You likewise, can decide for yourself what you might be.
I most certainly don't know. I can only see that which is apparent.
muhammad_isa
Well-Known Member
I'm afraid not. "It's not my fault, your honour" etc.
It is, imo.
One has to weigh up all the evidence, from Qur'an and hadith for example, to get some sort of idea of the nature of G-d.
He says in Qur'an that "G-d wrongs nobody .. it is mankind who wrong themselves"
..so if it is written in the first person .. third person .. plural etc.
it has no bearing on the exact nature of G-d.
God is a spiritual concept. It is natural enough for us to anthropmorphise Him, but that doesn't mean that it is so.
Augustus
…
Jesus wept, you are a glutton for punishment.
You'll find a whole load of scientists and philosophers of science who would disagree with you on that point. It basically reflects a naive pop-culture misunderstanding of the sciences. I know you hate reading, but if you are interested in being less wrong, look up the "demarcation problem" if you think it is simple to define what science is and is not.
Nobel winning physicist Steven Weinberg (also, usefully, he notes the changing standards of science over time which you wish to deny):
Not only does the fact that the standards of scientific success shift with time make the philosophy of science difficult; it also raises problems for the public understanding of science. We do not have a fixed scientific method to rally round and defend.
I remember a conversation I had years ago with a high school teacher, who explained proudly that in her school teachers were trying to get away from teaching just scientific facts, and wanted instead to give their students an idea of what the scientific method was. I replied that I had no idea what the scientific method was, and I thought she ought to teach her students scientific facts. She thought I was just being surly. But it’s true; most scientists have very little idea of what the scientific method is, just as most bicyclists have very little idea of how bicycles stay erect. In both cases, if they think about it too much, they’re likely to fall off.
Why are you so sure that there was no degree of scientific support for the idea that biology impacts human behaviour and thus society? Seems very odd to me.
One of us has posted evidence from multiple peer-reviewed journals or scholarly texts, the other has pompously declared himself right based on no evidence and obvious ignorance of the topics he/she is discussing.
Dismissing scholarship with TLDR and "tedious blather" rather than an actual rebuttal seems to illustrate your desire to remain as ignorant as possible which is the usual response of the RF "rationalist" when presented with scholarly evidence of their errors on topics they know nothing about.
Of course you did, cognitive dissonance is a powerful feature of human cognition after all and out of hand dismissal is easier than reading, critical thinking and the rational interpretation of evidence.
John 3:3
Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
What does "born again" mean.
It doesn't matter. The question is, whatever the interpretation is how would you judge is as wrong or right?
The one I'm aware of is the definition of Jihad. Some say this is an internal struggle, others an external one.
Ok, the two understanding of the word Jihad.
Is this a spiritual struggle or a battle against infidels?
Ok, I'm just more familiar with the various interpretations of the Bible.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Not Islam.
What ever the interpretation is not analysable. It has to be specific. Quote them directly.
Are you asking an objective question or what the Taliban or ISIL thinks? To analyse what any of these people think, you have to quote them directly with sources. Direct.
I understand that. You see Nakosis, there is an old story where a man lost his keys somewhere near his house, but there was no light to search for it. But outside a bit far away there was moon light in a clearing. So he was looking for the keys in that clearing. Someone asked "where did you lose your keys?", he replied "near my house", and the other man asked him "if your keys were lost near your house, why are looking for them here? Isn't it just absurd?", and he replied "well. this is the only place there is light".
Its absurd.
Hope you understand.
stevecanuck
Well-Known Member
I'm surprised that it took 622 posts for someone to introduce the "hate website" dodge. That completes the apologists bingo card.
stevecanuck
Well-Known Member
It's both. During the Medina years, it was (almost?) exclusively used in the context of making war. While summarizing the Qur'an I wrote the following explanation of the interchangeability of 'qatl' and 'jihad' (I say this only to preclude the possibility of someone accusing me of doing a cut and paste from some 'hate site'):
Surah 9 contains the following verses in which conjugations of 'jihad' (struggle) are clearly used interchangeably with those of 'qatl' (kill/fight), and all in the context of fighting for Allah and Islam. I have shown in parentheses whether 'qatl' or 'jihad' was used as the root word:
9:12 - But if, after coming to terms with you, they break their oaths and revile your belief, fight (qatl) the leaders of the disbelief - for they have no oaths - in order that they will desist.
9:13 - Will you not fight (qatl) against those who have broken their oaths and conspired to expel the Messenger?
9:14 - Fight (qatl) them, Allah will punish them with your hands and degrade them. He will grant you victory over them and heal the chests of a believing nation.
9:16 - Did you suppose that you would be left before Allah has known those of you who fought (jihad) and did not take a confidant other than Allah, His Messenger, and the believers? Allah is Aware of what you do.
9:19 - Do you consider giving drink to the pilgrims and inhabiting the Sacred Mosque are the same as one who believes in Allah and the Last Day, and struggles (jihad) in the Way of Allah? These are not held equal by Allah. Allah does not guide the harm doers. (In this case 'jihad' is interpreted in most translations as 'struggle' or 'strive', but is used in the context of fighting. Here, Allah is telling the faithful that simply cheering and praying will not please him as much as fighting).
9:20 - Those who believe, have migrated, and struggle (jihad) in the Way of Allah with their wealth and their persons are greater in rank with Allah. It is they who are the winners (continuation of 9:19).
9:24 - Say: 'If your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your tribes, the property you have acquired, the merchandise you fear will not be sold, and the homes you love, are dearer to you than Allah, His Messenger and the struggling (jihad) for His Way, then wait until Allah shall bring His command. Allah does not guide the evildoers'.
9:25- Allah has helped you on many a battle field. In the Battle of Hunain, when your numbers were pleasing you they availed you nothing; the earth, for all its vastness, seemed to close in upon you and you turned your backs and fled. (I've included this to prove that warfare is the topic at hand, lest anyone tries to tell us Mohamed was organizing a bake sale).
9:29 - Fight (qatl) those who neither believe in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not embrace the religion of the truth, being among those who have been given the Book (Bible and the Torah), until they pay tribute out of hand and have been humiliated.
9:39 - If you do not go forth, He will punish you with a painful punishment and replace you by another nation. You will in no way harm Him; for Allah has power over all things. (This shows Allah/Mohamed is still cajoling and threatening the faithful to lay down their lives for him. It also demonstrates that "go forth" is code for fighting.)
9:41 - Whether lightly or heavily, march on and struggle (jihad) for the Way of Allah, with your wealth and your persons. This will be best for you, if you know.
9:44 - Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day will not ask your permission so that they may struggle (jihad) with their wealth and themselves. Allah knows best the righteous.
Notice that 'qatl' is the root word for the first three verses above, but gives way to 'jihad' in the next four, reverts to 'qatl' in the infamous 9:29, then goes back to 'jihad' by 9:41, proving that the two are used interchangeably. As an aside, it also demonstrates that "go forth (9:39)" is code for going to battle.
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
How does that show no hypocrisy in your attitude towards accepting or rejecting scholarly interpretations of the Quran?
It clearly does, both factual and logical.
The arguments come from my head. The source material is the Quran, sunnah and authoritative tafsir.
BTW, you are committing the "genetic fallacy" here. An argument's source is irrelevant. It can only be judged on its substance.
Also, how do you define "hate website"? I suspect it is simply one that is critical of Islam.
Again, ironically it is Islam that often talks about disbelievers contemptuously.
It is completely understandable why most religionists think the way they do. However, those who insist on defending things like slavery, using female captives for sex, wife-beating, etc do deserve a modicum of contempt, as well as pity.
If god was not willing, would you be able to see me later?.."see" you later, God willing
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
I was on ignore for a while. Wonder how long before I'm back on the naughty step?
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
You have failed to demonstrate that.
Please try harder.
Well, this is the thing that you seem incapable of grasping, isn't it.Nah. Annisaa is "grown women". It is not referred to a young girl of 6. See, when you dont know the language, dont make false claims and pretend you know it.
Tell me. What is the arabic word for lets say a 6 year old girl?
If a woman has been married and had sex, she is clearly a "grown woman" in the context of being old enough to marry under that system, regardless of her age. Muhammad proved this by marrying Aisha when she was 6.
You claim that under Islam a female cannot be married until she is a "grown woman". Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6. Therefore she must have been a "grown woman" at the age of 6 years old. Therefore it is permitted to marry 6 year olds. QED.
It's a pretty straightforward concept.
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
Jeez, it's like a foreign language to you, isn't it? (Maybe it is, in which case, you're not doing to badly).
I do not believe that hadith are as historically accurate or authentic as Muslims do, but I accept that they believe them to be so.
I understand the level of importance put on the sahih collections of Bukhari and Muslim by most Muslims.
However, I also understand that a few dishonest apologists try to claim that certain sahih hadith are unreliable or inauthentic. Coincidentally these always seem to be hadith that cast Islam or Muhammad in a bad light. Hmm...
firedragon
Veteran Member
As usual, some ad hominem when confronted with the fact that, you are an apologist, with absolutely no knowledge on the subject.
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
So you admit that I never said ..."You have no knowledge in Classical Arabic".All you have done so far is just look for avenues to insult someone.
Why do you bother lying so blatantly when out posts are all there for inspection?
Really, what are you hoping to achieve?
If you believe there are problems with that hadith, then present your evidence.Tell me. Your favourite hadith that you believe in so much, information about it. I have asked many times. But you ignore it. Because you dont know the information. So you will make another insult.
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.
What's that? You won't?
Quelle surprise!
BTW, do you ask the same questions of Muslims when they cite hadith?
What's that? You don't?
Yet more intellectual dishonesty. Who'da thunkit?
firedragon
Veteran Member
Done and dusted. No one can do anything someone ignorant but pretends.
Anyway. that's done.
So, anything else? Any other book you wish to quote with out knowing what it is?
muhammad_isa
Well-Known Member
How do you mean?
Why should I accept anything that you claim is true?
You construct an argument [ from your head, you say ], that shows that G-d implies that it is OK to have sexual intercourse with under-age girls.
I simply don't agree with you.
If that is what some scholar is saying, then I don't agree with them, either.
That is not hypocrisy. That is thinking for myself, and not blindly following others.
You can accuse me of being "non-mainstream" or whatever.
Do you think that the majority of Muslims think that it is lawful?
I don't.
My experience with you, over the last few weeks, is that you
construct argumnets that are flawed in some way, but it is not always easy to see why.
I call a spade a spade, and I don't fear being ostracised by my fellow Muslims for not respecting certain scholars.
I DO have respect for Ibn Kathir. I don't think that he is incapable of making errors, and I'm not an expert like you imply that you are.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Nah. It is you who is in love with that hadith. So you should present your evidence that its historically accurate.
Burden of proof fallacy.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Always.
firedragon
Veteran Member
@KWED
Why do you ignore this post mate? No clue what to do other than another cheap insult? So that you cant ignore unless on purpose, I will cut and paste. Do another insult and get away from the fact that you are a hardcore hater who just wants to insult with no knowledge but some cut and pastes and pretence. Go ahead. Do another insult. Show how low some of these anti islamic, website scholars like you behave. Shame for atheist scholars. Atheist scholars are educated, and have dignity, but not missionaries like you.
If you want, you can research this. I know that you will try to insult and brush it off and go onto something. But well, I thought why not. You can ask anyone, you can do your research.
In "CLASSICAL ARABIC", a young woman is called Jariyah. A girl of playful age is called Jariyathu Alabu. Even in Bukhari, he refers to Aisha in one hadith as Jariyathu Alabu. Same Bukhari reports in the book of commentary, book 58, hadith number 1784 that a Surah or chapter (chapter 54) has a verse that was revealed when she was in mecca (Before the Hijra) and she was a "Jaariyathu Alabu" which means "a girl at playful age". When you look at the time this so called verse was given to her family, What does that mean? It means that Aisha was a young girl, who was of a playful age when this chapter 54 was revealed. Bukhari reports that she was of Akal age. Akal means the age of reason. So Aisha supposedly narrated this as she remembered and narrated the verse as well, and what age do you think she would have been in order to remember a verse of the Quran and to remember the day it was revealed or time period in Mecca? She would have been what age? 10? 8? And when was chapter 54 revealed?? It was revealed in 614 (10 years before the supposed marriage). Then how old do you think she would have been? 20? 18? There is no way she was so young "even according to ahadith" when she married because of this one factor. There are many. If you check a good Arabic lexicon which I presume you can easily do, a phrase like "Jaariyah" will mean "Young woman". Annisaa are older than them. this is Fusha Atthuraath.
Because you love this hadith so much I am giving you this explanation, if you care to read and understand. There are many ahadith about the sister of Aisha who was 10 years older to her. This is of course a very well known thing though. There is a book called Al Bidhayah wa al Nihayah which would mean the beginning and the end that speaks of Asma who is the sister of Aisha. This is a pretty large amount of work but it contains certain narratives that state this Asma's age in comparison to Aisha's. She was 10 years older.
Asma, Aishas sister is supposed have died in the 73rd year of Hijri which is reported by a scholar in traditional islamic circles had more respect in his sophisticated scholarship of Islam even in comparison to historian and scholar Ibn Kathir. His name was Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani. He reported in his book called Fine Tuning. 100-73 = 27. So at the time of Hijri, Asma was 27 years old. Which would mean Aisha was 17 years old. So this marriage which would have taken place in the 1st or 2nd Hijra makes Aisha 18 or 19. Is that another contradiction?
1. It is said that Asma, the sister of Aisha was ten years older. - (Atthabari)
2. And it also says that Asma died when she was 100 years old when she died, and it was the 73 Hijra. - (Tahzibut Tahzib)
3. Abu Bakr wished Aisha to be married 8 years before Hijra. So in the proponents logic, Aisha would have been just born, which is not.
4. That means obviously 100-73 = 27. So at the time of Hijri, Asma was 27 years old.
5. So it is only simple mathematics to understand that Aisha was 17 years old.
6. So this marriage which would have been taken place in the 1st or 2nd Hijra makes Aisha 18 or 19.
7. If you look at the hadith Aisha is referred to as Bikr, Not Jariah. Which means a woman of adult age, not a childhood or early teen age which is Jariah.
And we know that Jariyathu Alabu refers to a young girl at playful age, where as in Arabic, Annisaa is not word used for such young children. A young girl of growing up age is called Fathaaya. Annisaa is only grown women. It is not used for young girls. This verse says "Women", Annisaa. Not Fathaaya, Jariyah, or any arabic word used for girls of young ages.
I told you that you were appealing to authority. You told it was deferring to authority. But you are not giving the methodology used by these authorities. You dont allow any analysis. You want them to be as it is. No thinking. Just "appeal to authority". So you should understand that difference.
Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses [it is the same]: for those who carry [life within their wombs], their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy. – Quran 65:4
There are some translations which would say “Not yet menstruated” instead of “No courses”.
Take a holistic approach. Not just one cherry picked verse that suits your personal sentiment. Quran is one book.
This verse is speaking of women who go through a divorce where it stipulates certain conditions before the lady is to leave the premises where they had their marital life. So please understand that first, you are married because you are already fully grown, mature enough to manage your finances, balaghul nikaha and so forth. You are already married meeting these criteria and now you are going through a divorce.
Chapter 65 verse 4
1. Premise: In case of divorce (To get a divorce, you are already married. To be married, you are already old enough as spelled out earlier)
2. Wa allathi ya ishna minal maheedhi. Those who are done with their menstruation. Which means Ya Ishna, your menstruations are over. This is menopause. For them, at the time of a divorce their interim period is three months.
3. Wa allathi yaa hidhna means the ones who have not menstruated. Now this is the verse a lot of people use to insult the whole system of islam. But it’s a cheap trick. You will understand why.
It does not say “Never menstruated” and in classical Arabic this could never ever mean one who has not achieved puberty. It is completely illogical. As a non-muslim you could use this this maliciously to insult but also as a Muslim you could use this for your perverted intentions. But none of this is logical if you take the context of the Quran and you should see that its illogical.
You are talking of a girl who is already married because she has reached the right ripe age of marriage. Balagul nikaha. Now she is going through a divorce. And now she cannot be thrown out of where she is living for three months. Both, those who don’t get periods and those who have not got their periods yet after the decision is made, whoever they are cannot be sent out of their abode for 3 months AFTER THE DIVORCE IS CONFIRMED.
4. Hamal or pregnant women if you find them to be must be allowed fully to stay in the same premises until the delivery.
Cheers.
Why do you ignore this post mate? No clue what to do other than another cheap insult? So that you cant ignore unless on purpose, I will cut and paste. Do another insult and get away from the fact that you are a hardcore hater who just wants to insult with no knowledge but some cut and pastes and pretence. Go ahead. Do another insult. Show how low some of these anti islamic, website scholars like you behave. Shame for atheist scholars. Atheist scholars are educated, and have dignity, but not missionaries like you.
If you want, you can research this. I know that you will try to insult and brush it off and go onto something. But well, I thought why not. You can ask anyone, you can do your research.
In "CLASSICAL ARABIC", a young woman is called Jariyah. A girl of playful age is called Jariyathu Alabu. Even in Bukhari, he refers to Aisha in one hadith as Jariyathu Alabu. Same Bukhari reports in the book of commentary, book 58, hadith number 1784 that a Surah or chapter (chapter 54) has a verse that was revealed when she was in mecca (Before the Hijra) and she was a "Jaariyathu Alabu" which means "a girl at playful age". When you look at the time this so called verse was given to her family, What does that mean? It means that Aisha was a young girl, who was of a playful age when this chapter 54 was revealed. Bukhari reports that she was of Akal age. Akal means the age of reason. So Aisha supposedly narrated this as she remembered and narrated the verse as well, and what age do you think she would have been in order to remember a verse of the Quran and to remember the day it was revealed or time period in Mecca? She would have been what age? 10? 8? And when was chapter 54 revealed?? It was revealed in 614 (10 years before the supposed marriage). Then how old do you think she would have been? 20? 18? There is no way she was so young "even according to ahadith" when she married because of this one factor. There are many. If you check a good Arabic lexicon which I presume you can easily do, a phrase like "Jaariyah" will mean "Young woman". Annisaa are older than them. this is Fusha Atthuraath.
Because you love this hadith so much I am giving you this explanation, if you care to read and understand. There are many ahadith about the sister of Aisha who was 10 years older to her. This is of course a very well known thing though. There is a book called Al Bidhayah wa al Nihayah which would mean the beginning and the end that speaks of Asma who is the sister of Aisha. This is a pretty large amount of work but it contains certain narratives that state this Asma's age in comparison to Aisha's. She was 10 years older.
Asma, Aishas sister is supposed have died in the 73rd year of Hijri which is reported by a scholar in traditional islamic circles had more respect in his sophisticated scholarship of Islam even in comparison to historian and scholar Ibn Kathir. His name was Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani. He reported in his book called Fine Tuning. 100-73 = 27. So at the time of Hijri, Asma was 27 years old. Which would mean Aisha was 17 years old. So this marriage which would have taken place in the 1st or 2nd Hijra makes Aisha 18 or 19. Is that another contradiction?
1. It is said that Asma, the sister of Aisha was ten years older. - (Atthabari)
2. And it also says that Asma died when she was 100 years old when she died, and it was the 73 Hijra. - (Tahzibut Tahzib)
3. Abu Bakr wished Aisha to be married 8 years before Hijra. So in the proponents logic, Aisha would have been just born, which is not.
4. That means obviously 100-73 = 27. So at the time of Hijri, Asma was 27 years old.
5. So it is only simple mathematics to understand that Aisha was 17 years old.
6. So this marriage which would have been taken place in the 1st or 2nd Hijra makes Aisha 18 or 19.
7. If you look at the hadith Aisha is referred to as Bikr, Not Jariah. Which means a woman of adult age, not a childhood or early teen age which is Jariah.
And we know that Jariyathu Alabu refers to a young girl at playful age, where as in Arabic, Annisaa is not word used for such young children. A young girl of growing up age is called Fathaaya. Annisaa is only grown women. It is not used for young girls. This verse says "Women", Annisaa. Not Fathaaya, Jariyah, or any arabic word used for girls of young ages.
I told you that you were appealing to authority. You told it was deferring to authority. But you are not giving the methodology used by these authorities. You dont allow any analysis. You want them to be as it is. No thinking. Just "appeal to authority". So you should understand that difference.
Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses [it is the same]: for those who carry [life within their wombs], their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy. – Quran 65:4
There are some translations which would say “Not yet menstruated” instead of “No courses”.
Take a holistic approach. Not just one cherry picked verse that suits your personal sentiment. Quran is one book.
This verse is speaking of women who go through a divorce where it stipulates certain conditions before the lady is to leave the premises where they had their marital life. So please understand that first, you are married because you are already fully grown, mature enough to manage your finances, balaghul nikaha and so forth. You are already married meeting these criteria and now you are going through a divorce.
Chapter 65 verse 4
1. Premise: In case of divorce (To get a divorce, you are already married. To be married, you are already old enough as spelled out earlier)
2. Wa allathi ya ishna minal maheedhi. Those who are done with their menstruation. Which means Ya Ishna, your menstruations are over. This is menopause. For them, at the time of a divorce their interim period is three months.
3. Wa allathi yaa hidhna means the ones who have not menstruated. Now this is the verse a lot of people use to insult the whole system of islam. But it’s a cheap trick. You will understand why.
It does not say “Never menstruated” and in classical Arabic this could never ever mean one who has not achieved puberty. It is completely illogical. As a non-muslim you could use this this maliciously to insult but also as a Muslim you could use this for your perverted intentions. But none of this is logical if you take the context of the Quran and you should see that its illogical.
You are talking of a girl who is already married because she has reached the right ripe age of marriage. Balagul nikaha. Now she is going through a divorce. And now she cannot be thrown out of where she is living for three months. Both, those who don’t get periods and those who have not got their periods yet after the decision is made, whoever they are cannot be sent out of their abode for 3 months AFTER THE DIVORCE IS CONFIRMED.
4. Hamal or pregnant women if you find them to be must be allowed fully to stay in the same premises until the delivery.
Cheers.