The Hijab Problem

[Remté]

You're nimble, I'll grant you that.

But unless you can stick to the point, I don't have any more time for this.

OTOH, I hope you will stick to the point, because I'm sincerely interested in how you think about these ideas. But so far, you haven't really answered any of the questions I've asked you.

What questions?

 

[Remté]

Now you are applying a false standard. Why would one need to understand everything that the scholars understood? If the translation is clear then understanding everything that the scholar knew should not be necessary. To know how to add one does not need to understand tensor calculus if one's teacher also understood tensor calculus. And demanding that one understands the Arabic is also a false standard if you want to claim that it comes from God. God is rather incompetent if his message can only be understood in one language. Why not use English? Everyone understands English as long as you speak slowly enough and loudly enough (preferably in a Southern accent).

The translation may be good that doesn't mean the meaning is clear to everyone.

It was for the arabic speaking people. It was also for those living at that time. And it is for all people no matter what language they speak and when they live. However, of course things are difficult to translate perfectly which is why people who study the Quran seriously also study the arabic language if they are not a native speaker. Beaides that the Quran is not even written in the arabic of the modern day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The translation may be good that doesn't mean the meaning is clear to everyone.

It was for the arabic speaking people. It was also for those living at that time. And it is for all people no matter what language they speak and when they live. However, of course things are difficult to translate perfectly which is why people who study the Quran seriously also study the arabic language if they are not a native speaker. Beaides that the Quran is not even written in the arabic of the modern day.

And that is a problem for Islam. If this is supposedly the word of God or whatever phrase that Muslims use then the fact that it may not be clear, though it appears to be more than clear enough, then God's inability to get his meaning across puts doubts on the claim that it was from God. An omnipotent God should be able to get his message across clearly.

Also if you check with Muslims many of them do think that an appropriate punishment for leaving the faith is death. Where do you think they got that idea from? The verse cited gives very strong evidence that the belief came from the Quran.

 

[icehorse]

What questions?

1 - What makes you an authority of Islamic scripture that we should trust over those scholars who created popular and well regarded translations?
2 - Did you spend even a few minutes looking over the poll I sent you?
3 - Do you agree that a society that uses Sharia as its legal system is a theocracy?
4 - Do you agree that the Quran declares itself to be perfect and easy to understand?
5 - Do you agree that most Muslims are not scriptural scholars?
6 - Do you agree that Islamic scriptural scholars often disagree with each other?

There have been more questions, but that's a good start.

 

[Remté]

And that is a problem for Islam. If this is supposedly the word of God or whatever phrase that Muslims use then the fact that it may not be clear, though it appears to be more than clear enough, then God's inability to get his meaning across puts doubts on the claim that it was from God. An omnipotent God should be able to get his message across clearly.

Also if you check with Muslims many of them do think that an appropriate punishment for leaving the faith is death. Where do you think they got that idea from? The verse cited gives very strong evidence that the belief came from the Quran.

From Hadith.

 

[stvdv]

It is about war in the time of Muhammad. There was extreme hostility in between people and it wasn't safe to mingle with whosoever. So it was advised Muslims stick with Muslims, help Muslims.

Perhaps you never got to ayat 4:90?

"Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: Therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then Allah Hath opened no way for you (to war against them)." 4:90​

You did not read my reply properly at all it (according to your reply)

 

[stvdv]

Like I said before - perfectly understandable. It is a serious matter. Very important to Muslims.

That is the flaw in Islam, Koran and Muslims, what you exhibit here

 

[Subduction Zone]

From Hadith.

Blame the Hadith all you want, the roots are clearly in the Quran.

 

[stvdv]

You cannot go about trying to justify everything you say with one ayat. Or I suppose you can, but how could you assume you will succeed? The matter is just not that simple.

The matter only gets complicated if you try to twist verses to make obvious flaws disappear

 

[Remté]

1 - What makes you an authority of Islamic scripture that we should trust over those scholars who created popular and well regarded translations?

I am not and never have proclaimed myself an authority.

2 - Did you spend even a few minutes looking over the poll I sent you?

No, I disliked the link with no information attached - like most people if I see no information quoted I don't follow the link.

3 - Do you agree that a society that uses Sharia as its legal system is a theocracy?

The Sharia law is complicated also, but in short, no I do not.

4 - Do you agree that the Quran declares itself to be perfect and easy to understand?

No. Only with the latter because the word perfect is problematic here.

5 - Do you agree that most Muslims are not scriptural scholars?

Yes.

6 - Do you agree that Islamic scriptural scholars often disagree with each other?Yes. But the best of them not with big differences in their thinking for someone who is not very far in their studies. Merely a question of details.

 

[Remté]

Blame the Hadith all you want, the roots are clearly in the Quran.

No, they are not.

 

[stvdv]

From Hadith.

WRONG: this comes from verse 4:89, as I clearly have proven

 

[Remté]

WRONG: this comes from verse 4:89, as I clearly have proven

You haven't proven. You have speculated with no understanding of the topic.

 

[icehorse]

I am not and never have proclaimed myself an authority.

Well you've implied it.

No, I disliked the link with no information attached - like most people if I see no information quoted I don't follow the link.

The article is full of charts and graphs, not easy to put into words.

The Sharia law is complicated also, but in short, no I do not.

Well then, what's your definition of theocracy?

No. Only with the latter because the word perfect is problematic here.

It's not my word, it's the Quran's. All I'm doing is trying to take the Quran at face value. It declares itself to be perfect and easy to understand. You seem to disagree with the Quran on these points?

As for the differences in interpretations, I would say that you're understating the issues. For example it appears to the rest of the world as though Sunni and Shia have some pretty major disagreements, no?

 

[Remté]

Well then, what's your definition of theocracy?

I don't have my own definition. There is no theocracy in the Quran.

It's not my word, it's the Quran's. All I'm doing is trying to take the Quran at face value. It declares itself to be perfect and easy to understand. You seem to disagree with the Quran on these points?

I already mentioned the translation issue.

As for the differences in interpretations, I would say that you're understating the issues. For example it appears to the rest of the world as though Sunni and Shia have some pretty major disagreements, no?

Not to me it doesn't seem so.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, they are not.

Yet your denial could not refute the verse cited.

 

[icehorse]

Hey @Remté ,

You hold a lot of unusual views, and there's nothing wrong with that. My advice would be that you let people know that you're mostly speaking for yourself, and not really representing any common understandings of Islam.

Thanks for the unusual discussion.

 

[stvdv]

Remte, you have proven the biggest flaw in Islam and Koran by your writings over and over again last 24 hours

I asked you a simple question: "Do you admit it is wrong to say "Islam is better than other religions/atheism?"
You did not reply to this. Together with your belittling replies this proves to me that "you believe Islam is better than other religions/atheism"
THIS ARROGANCE IS THE BIGGEST FLAW IN ISLAM/KORAN
This arrogant "Hitler kind" superiority complex explains to me:
1) Why you did not object to "nuking holland over a childish Muhammed context (this seems like terrorism to me)"
2) Why you seem to believe Muslims have the right to impose "Muhammed drawing contest ban on other countries"
3) Why you belittle us whenever we explain english Koran verses IF you can't proof we are wrong
4) Why debating Muslims leads nowhere, because Muslims can't be honest and admit there is a flaw in Koran

I asked you a simple question: "Do you admit it is wrong to nuke a country just about a drawing contest about Muhammed?"
And you could not reply with "NO",
You even said "Why is the nuke an issue?"
And you said "perfectly understandable. It is a serious matter. Very important to Muslims"
I would call this terrorism, especially seeing the arrogant disrespectful reply when G.Wilders cancelled it

I gave a good explanation of verse 4:89
This is one of the simple and straightforward verses
You just belittled me, that I don't understand Koran
You did not even read what I wrote, proven by your replies
And you expect us, non Muslims, to believe you, Muslims? And to take you serious?

I am done with Muslims, you have given proof enough today. Next time I will write G.Wilders to go ahead
Useless to debate with people who are arrogantly believing/declaring their religion to be superior
Good lesson, Islam is finished for me. Muslim arrogance destroys the good verses in Koran

Spoiler: Previous replies on this subject (I used for the above)

The issue was was about disrespect. The contest - made to provoke on purpose - was extremely disrespectful. According to the law they could have done it. But it is a horrible idea that insults the Muslims all over the world.

I agree it is disrespectful, but you should then also admit that it is wrong to threaten to nuke
I do not only talk, I even wrote Geert Wilders an email that he should not do this
But there is a reason that Geert Wilders started the contest
And that is because of disrespect of Muslims towards us

If a religion claims "Our religion is better than yours (or better than atheists)" then this is disrespect (belittling)
Naturally resulting in a reaction (and I am fair, Christians make the same error)

Do you admit it is wrong to say "Islam is better than other religions/atheism?"
I do remind you of the Koran verse saying "Allah will judge about your disagreements"

WRONG !!! According to all 7 english translations given by @Subduction Zone

The 7 english translations do not say this. And I see at least 3 Muslim names who translated this. So how you come to this convenient translation, while these 7 english translations clearly tell a completely different story?

I will make it simple by going line by line:
1) They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike.
No real problem yet (except it seems like reverse evangelism). Non Muslims are said to want Muslims to become Non Muslims
How it is written does not seem to be violent, they just want them to "be alike", I see no hostility here.
2) So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah
Clearly this is all about evangelizing. Non Muslims should become Muslims otherwise stay away (don't become allies). Fair enough.
3) But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.
So IF they turn away from Islam THEN kill them. Seems to me a lot of violence IF they want to leave Islam
It is not about them going to war with Muslim, they just leave Islam. The word used is "renegades" those leaving Islam, not about war at all. And it is know in Islam that they are not to friendly towards apostates. Another word used is "enmity" meaning opposition, meaning leaving Islam. Another word used "if they turn back" that is too obvious to explain. And another says "if they turn back (from Islam)" that is even more obvious.

Islam does not impose Islam on non Muslims, BUT it imposes Islam on Muslims, meaning you are not allowed to leave Islam.
Clearly this is mentioned by this verse. It is not at all about war.
YES THEY CALL THIS "minor jihād" in some articles I read

Now you will tell me, you should have read the context. So let me assure you that I did read it. And this was very simple:
a) The verses before tell us that if Allah has decided that they don't want to become Muslim, you as a Muslim should not have the arrogance to believe that you can impose Islam on them. So this is definitely not talking about war, nor talking about evangelizing (Muslim should not do this)

b) The verses after clearly talk about war. And here you make the big mistake. The verses 4:90 and following talk about war. But verse 4:89 is very specific talking about people who converted to Islam, and when they want to leave Islam then you can kill them, because apostacy is not allowed. Islam does not impose Islam on non Muslims, but once you are Muslim you are not allowed to leave Islam

So you are totally wrong that verse 4:89 is about war. It is NOT. It can be called "minor jihād", but not the war that you implied. This is about "personal" war (leaving Islam)
Proof that I am right here, is that the first 2 lines clearly do not talk about any violence of non Muslims towards Muslims. They just wish you were non Believers as they are.

Spoiler: Koran verse 4:89

Sahih International: They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.

Pickthall: They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,

Yusuf Ali: They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-

Shakir: They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

Muhammad Sarwar: They wish you to become unbelievers as they themselves are. Do not establish friendship with them until they have abandoned their homes for the cause of God. If they betray you, seize them and slay them wherever you find them. Do not establish friendship with them or seek their help

Mohsin Khan: They wish that you reject Faith, as they have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So take not Auliya' (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allah (to Muhammad SAW). But if they turn back (from Islam), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them, and take neither Auliya' (protectors or friends) nor helpers from them.

Arberry: They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper

You misunderstand the verse.

Why is the nuke an issue? It was an extremist who mentioned it, not just Muslims in general. Should they defend themselves because one among them speaks this way?

Why is the nuke an issue?
Are you from ISIS?

You did not read the article obviously ... thousands were on the streets

Perhaps you never got to ayat 4:90?

Like I said before - perfectly understandable. It is a serious matter. Very important to Muslims.

From Hadith.

You did not read my reply properly at all it (according to your reply)

That is the flaw in Islam, Koran and Muslims, what you exhibit here

WRONG: this comes from verse 4:89, as I clearly have proven

You haven't proven. You have speculated with no understanding of the topic.

 

[Remté]

I asked you a simple question: "Do you admit it is wrong to say "Islam is better than other religions/atheism?"
You did not reply to this.

Because what is better? What does it mean? The question is inane.

1) Why you did not object to "nuking holland over a childish Muhammed context (this seems like terrorism to me)"

I explained away the argument against Muslims over "nuking Holland" - it was not made by Muslims but by one extremist Muslim.

2) Why you seem to believe Muslims have the right to impose "Muhammed drawing contest ban on other countries"

I already indirectly suggested that Muslims were not trying to "impose a ban" - although you conveniently changed the wording here.

3) Why you belittle us whenever we explain english Koran verses IF you can't proof we are wrong

If you bothered about it you could easily prove yourselves wrong.

4) Why debating Muslims leads nowhere, because Muslims can't be honest and admit there is a flaw in Koran

What flaw are you talking about this time? You haven't mentioned any that aren't dependend on you imagination.

I asked you a simple question: "Do you admit it is wrong to nuke a country just about a drawing contest about Muhammed?"
And you could not reply with "NO",
You even said "Why is the nuke an issue?"
And you said "perfectly understandable. It is a serious matter. Very important to Muslims"
I would call this terrorism, especially seeing the arrogant disrespectful reply when G.Wilders cancelled it

Maybe you didn't notice it was the protests I called understandable. What did you expect them to do after cancellation? Thank him for not doing a horrible wrong?

I gave a good explanation of verse 4:89

It is an extremely bad one.

This is one of the simple and straightforward verses
You just belittled me, that I don't understand Koran
You did not even read what I wrote, proven by your replies

I did but apparently you still missed ayat 4:90, which suggests you didn't read my reply.

 

[stvdv]

I did but apparently you still missed ayat 4:90, which suggests you didn't read my reply.