ISIL, Taliban = True Islam??

[KWED]

Unfortunately, he does. Verse 4:24 (among others) allows for the rape of enslaved and captive women, "And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess". Also note that the need for consent is in no way implied.

Worth bearing in mind that it was not considered "rape" at the time (although it now universally constitutes that in national and international law). In fact, there is no concept of "rape" (sex without consent) in Islam.

 

[KWED]

I think you're referring to the Throw-crap-against-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks fallacy.

Also "Brandolini's Law" Brandolini's law - Wikipedia

 

[muhammad_isa]

Unfortunately, he does. Verse 4:24 (among others) allows for the rape of enslaved and captive women, "And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess".

As for female captives, Imam Bukhari quotes the Prophet SAW, as saying: If any of you have a slave girl, whom he gives good education and excellent training, and then he emancipates her and marries her, he shall have a two-fold reward.

G-d guides whomsoever He wills, and sends astray whomsoever He wills.
It is about the state of the heart. Many people wrong their own souls. Fighting the wisdom of G-d is futile.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Iddah is a universal Islamic principle. If a woman is divorced or widowed, she must wait three periods (or three months if she doesn't menstruate.
The purpose of this wait is to remove any question over paternity. There is only a question over paternity if she had sex with both her previous and her new husband.
It really isn't that difficult. (It never ceases to amaze how often apologists have little more than a basic grasp of what Islam actually contains beyond praying, fasting, and telling their women what to wear)

You really haven't got a clue about people's responsibilities to each other.
I don't feel in the mood to teach you, because you seem to think that you know it all already.

Oh, and btw, I'm not an "apologist". I have been an adult Muslim for 45 years.
I have nothing to apologise for.
All praise is due to G-d who has enlightened me and blessed me with the truth,
and nothing but the truth..
Without G-d's mercy, I wouldn't have been guided to the straight path.
I do not credit myself .. it is all the doing of God, the Most High.
If it was not His will, I could not be a Muslim.

 

[stevecanuck]

="Nakosis, post: 7450977, member: 34180"]Without God or Muhammad around to verify what is correct how could you verify which interpretation is correct?

Is ISIL or the Taliban more correct than some other interpretation? Whatever claim made, how would you validate the claim?

If people say the Taliban is the correct interpretation, how would you prove them wrong.

The problem is the word "interpretation" which allows a broad avenue of creative license. People will go with whatever they feel is correct.

For me, like the Bible, I start off assuming all interpretations are wrong. With the Quran and the Bible we are given claims made by other people as to what these messengers said. Which could itself be right/wrong/totally made up. From this we have to rely of an third interpretation. I've see how broadly the Bible can be interpreted. I'd suspect the same is true of the Quran.

I believe Mohamed authored the Qur'an, not a god that I don't think exists - just to let you know my POV.

I can assure you he meant for it to be followed, not interpreted. He undoubtedly thought he was spelling out "God's" wishes in no uncertain terms. The fact that there are inconsistencies in it that could lead to differing opinions only serves to support my contention that a fallible man, not a god, created it.

Despite frequent inconsistencies and the make-it-up-as-you-go-along style, the overall message is indeed pretty clear. Fast-forward to the chronological end of the Qur'an after Islam has well and truly been turned into a warrior religion, and Mohamed delivered this gem:

9:111 - "Allah hath bought from the believers their lives and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs: they shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain". Now, I ask you - how many "interpretations" can be taken from that?

 

[stevecanuck]

Wirth bearing in mind that it was not considered "rape" at the time (although it now universally constitutes that in national and international law). In fact, there is no concept of "rape" (sex without consent) in Islam.

Correct. Verse 2:223 says as much - "Your wives are a tilth for you, so go into your tilth when you like".

(Btw, as suggested by another poster, I've never actually read the Qur'an. I'm just taking wild guesses..)

 

[muhammad_isa]

The Quran did contain some progressive elements 1400 years ago. However, today it contains far too much violence, intolerance and discrimination to have any valuable role in society, beyond spiritual symbolism..

Firstly, I think you mean "Islam" and not the Qur'an. The Qur'an has not changed.
Violence does not happen without a reason. Religions aren't to blame for terrorism. When people get desperate, they succumb to evil.
There has always been oppression in the world. Christians oppressing Muslims, or Muslims oppressing Christians.
Communists oppressing capitalists, or capitalists oppressing communists etc. etc.
It is about mankind's nature. They have love for wealth and power.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I believe Mohamed authored the Qur'an,.

Millions of people think that. It is an uninformed opinion.
In the same way that people deny Jesus, people deny Muhammad.
It is so easy to make a claim.
However, it is not so easy to back it up.

Were Muhammad and his companions all "in it together" ?
..or what?

 

[sun rise]

Unfortunately, he does. Verse 4:24 (among others) allows for the rape of enslaved and captive women, "And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess". Also note that the need for consent is in no way implied.

And all married women except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah's ordinance to you, and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.

Historical relativism is all well and good, but it cannot apply to an ideology that claims timeless perfection and objective moral supremacy.

Christianity does the same. The USA's motto is the same "New order of the ages" and so forth.

 

[stevecanuck]

As for female captives, Imam Bukhari quotes the Prophet SAW, as saying: If any of you have a slave girl, whom he gives good education and excellent training, and then he emancipates her and marries her, he shall have a two-fold reward.

That doesn't mean he can't have sex with her when he wants to.

G-d guides whomsoever He wills, and sends astray whomsoever He wills.

It is about the state of the heart. Many people wrong their own souls. Fighting the wisdom of G-d is futile.

That was just a random speech that has nothing to do with anything we were discussing.

 

[sun rise]

In fact, there is no concept of "rape" (sex without consent) in Islam.

Talk about being ignorant. 10 seconds with google and

Rape in Islamic law - Wikipedia

Accordingly, sexual violation is regarded as a violation of moral and divine law.[1] Islam divided claims of sexual violation into 'divine rights' (huquq Allah) and 'interpersonal rights' (huquq al-'ibad): the former requiring divine punishment (hadd penalties) and the latter belonging to the more flexible human realm.[2]

Rape is considered a serious sexual crime in Islam. In Islam, rape is called Zina Al-Zibr[3] or Ightisab,[4] and it falls under the rules of Hirabah.[5] Classical Islamic law (Shari'a) regarded the crime of sexual violation as a coercive zina, and therefore a hadd offence.[1] There is also a lack of recognition of marital rape by mainstream jurists.[6]

Until just recently in the "enlightened" USA

 

[stevecanuck]

Millions of people think that. It is an uninformed opinion.
In the same way that people deny Jesus, people deny Muhammad.
It is so easy to make a claim.
However, it is not so easy to back it up.

Were Muhammad and his companions all "in it together" ?
..or what?

I don't think so. I think Mohamed had them all hoodwinked. He (through the Qur'an) told them literally hundreds of times that they would burn forever if they didn't follow him. People already prone to superstitious belief are easily frightened into obedience.

 

[stevecanuck]

Talk about being ignorant. 10 seconds with google and

Rape in Islamic law - Wikipedia

Accordingly, sexual violation is regarded as a violation of moral and divine law.[1] Islam divided claims of sexual violation into 'divine rights' (huquq Allah) and 'interpersonal rights' (huquq al-'ibad): the former requiring divine punishment (hadd penalties) and the latter belonging to the more flexible human realm.[2]

Rape is considered a serious sexual crime in Islam. In Islam, rape is called Zina Al-Zibr[3] or Ightisab,[4] and it falls under the rules of Hirabah.[5] Classical Islamic law (Shari'a) regarded the crime of sexual violation as a coercive zina, and therefore a hadd offence.[1] There is also a lack of recognition of marital rape by mainstream jurists.[6]

Until just recently in the "enlightened" USA

If you're going shout, at least stay on topic. To be clear, random rape is not allowed in Islam. What is allowed is sex, minus any need for consent, with wives, slaves, and captives of war.

 

[stevecanuck]

And all married women except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah's ordinance to you,

Right, that's one category that we've already established. There's a "Forbidden to you" in front of that. And that means captor can rape captive.

and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.

New subject. It was in the same sentence and only separated by a comma, so I can understand why you thought the two were lumped together by the same rules. Not so. This is about relations with women who are not captives, and of course it demands marriage occur first. Read it again if you're confused.

 

[firedragon]

Without God or Muhammad around to verify what is correct how could you verify which interpretation is correct?

Give an example.

Is ISIL or the Taliban more correct than some other interpretation? Whatever claim made, how would you validate the claim?

What is their so called "Interpretation"?

If people say the Taliban is the correct interpretation, how would you prove them wrong.

These are just general comments Nakosis. I understand your question, but one cannot answer "if" situations which are just hypothetical. Find something exactly specific and one could discuss.

For me, like the Bible, I start off assuming all interpretations are wrong. With the Quran and the Bible we are given claims made by other people as to what these messengers said. Which could itself be right/wrong/totally made up. From this we have to rely of an third interpretation. I've see how broadly the Bible can be interpreted. I'd suspect the same is true of the Quran.

I am not going to Bible vs Quran debates in this thread. It will go on another track for sure.

 

[firedragon]

I can only assume your refusal to explain your obsession with this word, or even to say what it is, indicates that you don't know.

If pose a question in that way, you really should know the answer.

Lol. I already gave you the word. You missed that post totally because you didnt know how to answer it. If you have a tad bit of humility, you will see it.

Go ahead. Another insult. Cmon.

 

[firedragon]

Are you claiming that Ibn Abbas' tafsir does not contain that explanation?

Haha. You were looking at another book on the internet, insulted me saying I dont have it, while all the time you quoted the wrong book. See, being a little humble when you have made a mistake in a hurry to insult someone won't result in you losing yourself.

The verse does not say anything about little girls. It is speaking about women. Grown women who are married. Annisaa.

Simple. This is the Quranic text.

 

[firedragon]

Do you think a 9 year old girl can be a "grown woman"?

You are speaking about a verse in the Quran. Where does it talk about a 9 year old girl?

 

[firedragon]

In the context of Islamic belief!

I get it now. You are trying to act stupid in an attempt to get me to give up in exasperation, so you can somehow claim victory. Otherwise known as "pigeon chess".

No no. What you are doing is a typical, daily seen missionary tactic. "I am quoting hadith because you believe it, not because I believe it". But the thing is, we dont believe it so strongly like you do.

In Islamic tradition these ahadith have been discussed and debated so much that you should try and learn these things prior to teaching others about their beliefs.

Second thing is, you are quoting ahadith as if they are verified history. Which is "your belief". You are quoting it.

No. They all say "Too young to have started menstruation".

No. The text does not say it. Where did that "Too Young" part come from?

Wa allathi yaa hidhna. THere is no "Too young" in it.

 

[firedragon]

No, ISIS, Khomeini, Taliban, all claim they have a Godly government.

Please quote ISIS and Taliban directly where they claim "they have a Godly government". Lets see what they are actually saying.