Ask About Islam - an independent perspective.

[KWED]

What is the point of quoting scripture when we are dealing with an organized religion that has grown around multiple attempts at interpreting said scripture in particular ways?

Because we are looking at what Allah and Muhammad actually said and did (supposedly), not what subsequent generations wanted them to have said.

Wouldn't it make more sense to look at Islamic jurisprudence and theology and find the common or popular strands of religious interpretation and practice there?

No.

 

[KWED]

So how do you know for a religion, which is based on faith, what is the correct answer? I mean, how do you know, because you can't use knowledge on faith, as it is not a matter of knowledge, but faith?

That is the point. My answers will be based on the actual content of scripture, what the texts say - not on what a person finds it personally acceptable to believe, which seems to be one of the problems with previous such threads.

 

[Kooky]

Because we are looking at what Allah and Muhammad actually said and did (supposedly), not what subsequent generations wanted them to have said.

Why is that more important to our understanding of "Islam" than the Islam that is factually being practiced, taught and lived by factually existing people? In what capacity is what you are referring to even Islam qua Islam, rather than your personalized construction of what you think true Islam ought to be?

 

[KWED]

How do you know that?

And this is not the thread for your inane "how does anyone know anything" sideshow.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That is the point. My answers will be based on the actual content of scripture, what the texts say - not on what a person finds it personally acceptable to believe, which seems to be one of the problems with previous such threads.

So you believe that the correct way to do it, is your way? Do you have any evidence for that?

 

[KWED]

Why is that more important to our understanding of "Islam" than the Islam that is factually being practiced, taught and lived by factually existing people?

Because a million different Muslims could make a million different claims about what Islam is, and half of them could have nothing to do with the contents of the Quran or sunnah.

In what capacity is what you are referring to even Islam qua Islam, rather than your personalized construction of what you think true Islam ought to be?

I have no position on what Islam ought to be.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And this is not the thread for your inane "how does anyone know anything" sideshow.

No, we are inside methodological naturalism for this one. So you just give evidence based on that for how you know, which is the correct way to do it. Remember that one - evidence.

 

[KWED]

So you believe that the correct way to do it, is your way? Do you have any evidence for that?

It is a different way. If you are not happy with it, feel free to not ask me any questions about Islam.

 

[muhammad_isa]

We all used to be Muslim, according to Islam.
Would it make a difference?

Does it make any difference that shaytan used to be with the angels worshipping G-d?
..just because shaytan is very knowledgable, it doesn't follow that you can trust him.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It is a different way. If you are not happy with it, feel free to not ask me any questions about Islam.

So it is based on how you believe? Or what?

 

[Kooky]

Because a million different Muslims could make a million different claims about what Islam is, and half of them could have nothing to do with the contents of the Quran or sunnah.

And that is Islam as it factually exists in our world.

So the insight you are offering is not into Islam as it is factually beight taught, lived and practiced, but into your personal interpretation of its scriptures.

I have no position on what Islam ought to be.

You claim to accurately answer questions about Islam, while completely discarding factual Islamic practice and theology. The accuracy of your answers therefore cannot be based on a factually existing Islam, but only an idealized version of it.

 

[KWED]

Does it make any difference that shaytan used to be with the angels worshipping G-d?

To me? No.

..just because shaytan is very knowledgable, it doesn't follow that you can trust him.

Yes, the Quran and sunnah are pretty negative towards Shaytan, despite him being an ex-angel.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

As the last couple of AAI threads seemed to be just intended for preaching dogma with no attempt at actually informing, discussing or responding to questions in good faith, I thought I'd start one where there will be no agenda other than to present what the Quran, sunnah and classical tafsir actually say on an issue. No sectarianism. No opinions (apart from those of authoritative classical scholars). Just the 'facts', ma'am.

And I promise not to accuse anyone of hate or bashing or ignorance if they don't agree with my replies. And I won't put anyone on ignore if I can't come up with an answer.

The classical scholars sometimes have different opinions. How do you choose which scholar is telling the truth?
Those classical scholars date back to long before, how do you tell if what is attributed to then is actually true?
Do you accept Imam Sadigh as an scholar?

 

[KWED]

So it is based on how you believe? Or what?

Neither.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

That is a sectarian/political issue. I am dealing only with scriptural/ideological content.

How do you know it is a political issue?
According to stories in Islam, Shia says, Muhammad appointed Ali after Himself as who people were to refer to as a leader after His passing.
If this is political then why Muhammad Himself is not a political leader?

 

[KWED]

And that is Islam as it factually exists in our world.

Indeed, but the Islam that factually exists in the world is often not the same as the Islam that exists in the Quran and sunnah. I am dealing with the latter here rather than the former.
If you want to ask questions about how individual Muslims implement their own interpretations of scripture, I suggest you ask them.

So the insight you are offering is not into Islam as it is factually beight taught, lived and practiced, but into your personal interpretation of its scriptures.

No. It is what scriptures actually say. If any interpretation is required I will defer to authoritative classical scholars.

You claim to accurately answer questions about Islam, while completely discarding factual Islamic practice and theology. The accuracy of your answers therefore cannot be based on a factually existing Islam, but only an idealized version of it.

Correct.
Think of it like a thousand year, billion people, multiple line game of Chinese whispers. If you want to know what the original message was it is better to look at the piece of paper it was written on rather than ask the people at the end of the lines.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Neither.

Neither what you believe or what as such? So it is based on nothing, since or what as such. covers everything else than belief. Is that correct? Or it is actually based on something?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

...
No. It is what scriptures actually say. If any interpretation is required I will defer to authoritative classical scholars.
...

How do you know that it is the correct way to do it? You know, evidence and all that.

 

[KWED]

The classical scholars sometimes have different opinions. How do you choose which scholar is telling the truth?
Those classical scholars date back to long before, how do you tell if what is attributed to then is actually true?

Indeed. I use Ibn Kathir, for two main reasons.
1. His tafsir is the most widely used today so it can't be accused of being a minority or extremist view.
2. I have a copy of it in English.

Do you accept Imam Sadigh as an scholar?

I accept we was a scholar (although it is quite a vague term), but I don't use him as a reference (see above).

 

[KWED]

How do you know it is a political issue?
According to stories in Islam, Shia says, Muhammad appointed Ali after Himself as who people were to refer to as a leader after His passing.
If this is political then why Muhammad Himself is not a political leader?

Muhammad was a political leader. And a military one. Thought that was taken for granted.