Why do you dislike Islam?

[Nakosis]

If that were the case, I'd not be here would I?

In context, the verses apply to those who have stubbornly closed their hearts to and minds and are adamant in their disbelief !

Peace

Ok, in context of your belief. The words themselves are pretty clear.

Christians also see the need to understand the words of the Bible in "context" of their beliefs.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

From now on any discussion about Shari'ah Law I am done. I hate being repetitive. I have told you guys what Shari'ah and fiqh is so now we are going in circles any questions about the law ask Muslim. This is getting irritating. It is turning into "okay I see your evidence but I still believe what I believe." If that is the case we don't need to have a discussion anymore about Shari'ah Law.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

For Sure you have read Sunni Kalam.
This is one of the issues of debate between the Sunnis and the Shiites..
Try to read some Shia Kalam books..
Here are many shia books:
Free Islamic Books by Scholars. Browse 1700+ resources | Al-Islam.org

p.s.

just found this article from the same site..
i have only looked at it. it seems to reflect the shia view well, as we have many hadiths talking about the middle way..

The Issue of Predestination and Free Will

Thank you...I will take a look at it at work. I find it sad that there is a Shiite Islamic point of view and Sunni point of view

 

[Kuzcotopia]

any questions about the law ask Muslim.

We did. Lots of them.

We asked Muslims these questions about Sharia law, got answers, and many on this thread has shared them with you.

We got these answers by Muslims which explain why many feel that Islam often seems to produce bad or immoral ideas in its adherents.

I'm not sure why you made the thread if you are frustrated by the answers. Address this issue instead of ignoring it or deflecting or calling people unknowledgable . . . and I have a feeling it will get better for you.

 

[Notanumber]

From now on any discussion about Shari'ah Law I am done. I hate being repetitive. I have told you guys what Shari'ah and fiqh is so now we are going in circles any questions about the law ask Muslim. This is getting irritating. It is turning into "okay I see your evidence but I still believe what I believe." If that is the case we don't need to have a discussion anymore about Shari'ah Law.

I don’t blame you. It is indefensible.

 

[Ponder This]

Data
Atheists face death in 13 countries, global discrimination: study

13 countries have death penalty for apostasy.

But this year’s more comprehensive study showed six more, bringing the full list to Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.


The report below analyzes the severity of blasphemy laws by country.

Report link

Respecting Rights? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws

I think this provides good reason to conclude that a majoritarian Islamic society as they are today are in general incompatible with the classical liberal freedoms of religion, conscience, speech and pluralism. It's a situation like Marxism in the 20th century. While there were many enlightened Marxists in the Western world, where ever Marxist ideology became a majority, citizen's rights were severely compromised. Hence I feel obliged to oppose the growth of Islam until I am convinced that liberal Islam can actually hold its own against Islamist movements. The fate of the Arab spring and the backsliding of Turkey provides no justification for such optimism.

"For God's Sake" holy meaningless statistic time... "highest deviation from international and human rights law principles". What does that even mean? That's not a standard deviation. It's not anything.

 

[sayak83]

"For God's Sake" holy meaningless statistic time... "highest deviation from international and human rights law principles". What does that even mean? That's not a standard deviation. It's not anything.

Read the report and how the measurements are done.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I don’t blame you. It is indefensible.

Especially for someone who isn't a Muslim and doesn't know as much about the religion as a practising Muslim

 

[YmirGF]

Especially for someone who isn't a Muslim and doesn't know as much about the religion as a practising Muslim

I'm inclined to let it slide as Shariah is different in every country it is adopted. There is no single "sharia law". Likewise, there are thousands of aspects of Sharia law that I don't think would upset anyone. No more so than looking at some stupid laws that are still on the books in any country.

 

[Akivah]

The prophet foretold that Muslims will be the weakest near the end times, their
leaders will be oppressors and they will have no freedom, the caliphate will be lost
and it'll be divided into states, the prophet said that Islam with the power of God will return as one state and one leader, also during that time Israel will be controlling
Jerusalem before being liberated by the Muslims.

Has any knowledgeable Muslim at any time in the past, applied this prophecy to a different time?

 

[FearGod]

Has any knowledgeable Muslim at any time in the past, applied this prophecy to a different time?

No, never

 

[Nakosis]

The claim was validated to be true1500 years ago and the quran and major
events proves to me without any doubt that Islam is the truth, I'm speaking
about myself and what I believe and I don't care about what you think about
the prophet and Islam.

Right, but we're talking about beliefs. In the same manner you can disregard my beliefs I can disregard your beliefs except I'm not claiming that God has given any person the authority to speak for him.

For example, I could claim that dolphins were created by God because folks lost their way crossing a rainbow bridge between islands and God feeling sorry for those folks turned them into dolphins so they could survive in the water. And I believe the existence of dolphins and rainbows are sufficient proof for me to accept this as true. However, I really shouldn't have any expectation of you accepting it as true. It's just not rational for me to expect you to accept such a claim without providing a sufficient level of proof.

Now if I really believe this to be true, I would expect of myself to be able to provide whatever evidence necessary to convince you of this truth, it is true after all regardless of whatever degree of skepticism you possess. If fact the more skepticism the better. Any claims of truth should be easily tested by any wishing to do so.

What the Qu'ran is saying is where you can't convince another of your truth, don't question your truth, just assume God made them spiritually ignorant. The problem with this is it sets a pretty low bar for what you personally accept as truth.

 

[Nakosis]

Muhammad we can't prove existed?

Original Letters of Prophet Muhammad SAW

We cannot prove Moses was a spokesman for God either, after all clinically he could be a schizophrenic with a stuttering problem. This is where faith comes in. But among some of the aforementioned prophets there is physical evidence of Muhammad's existence.

In the modern age the Prophetical documents have had limited success as relics. The manuscripts that have surfaced were dismissed early on by Western scholars as forgeries based on historical considerations and palaeographical grounds,

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/77783/smirza_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

You're kind of stuck having to prove this documents were actually written by Muhammad vs simply accepting this to be true.

 

[Faithofchristian]

In the modern age the Prophetical documents have had limited success as relics. The manuscripts that have surfaced were dismissed early on by Western scholars as forgeries based on historical considerations and palaeographical grounds,

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/77783/smirza_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

You're kind of stuck having to prove this documents were actually written by Muhammad vs simply accepting this to be true.

Nakosis, If I may say, We know definitely that Muhammad did not written the q'uran. Seeing Muhammad couldn't read or write.
But had his wife to read and write for him.
It's all there in the q'uran.

 

[FearGod]

Right, but we're talking about beliefs. In the same manner you can disregard my beliefs I can disregard your beliefs except I'm not claiming that God has given any person the authority to speak for him.

Does God need to come to you personally and to everyone?

For example, I could claim that dolphins were created by God because folks lost their way crossing a rainbow bridge between islands and God feeling sorry for those folks turned them into dolphins so they could survive in the water. And I believe the existence of dolphins and rainbows are sufficient proof for me to accept this as true. However, I really shouldn't have any expectation of you accepting it as true. It's just not rational for me to expect you to accept such a claim without providing a sufficient level of proof.

Yes of course a sufficient level of proof is a must.

Now if I really believe this to be true, I would expect of myself to be able to provide whatever evidence necessary to convince you of this truth, it is true after all regardless of whatever degree of skepticism you possess. If fact the more skepticism the better. Any claims of truth should be easily tested by any wishing to do so.

There are many evidences proving to me that Islam is the truth, but it doesn't
work with you and for some others.

What the Qu'ran is saying is where you can't convince another of your truth, don't question your truth, just assume God made them spiritually ignorant. The problem with this is it sets a pretty low bar for what you personally accept as truth.

Yes for the others but for me the quran is a proof of God existence.

 

[Nakosis]

Nakosis, If I may say, We know definitely that Muhammad did not written the q'uran. Seeing Muhammad couldn't read or write.
But had his wife to read and write for him.
It's all there in the q'uran.

That was my first thought too, but I wanted to check to see what support for it existed.

 

[Nakosis]

Does God need to come to you personally and to everyone?

No, but it I make a claim that God did come to me personally with a message, don't you think I should be able to provide proof to you of that if I expect you to accept my claim?

Yes of course a sufficient level of proof is a must.

What would I need to do to provide sufficient proof to you?

There are many evidences proving to me that Islam is the truth, but it doesn't work with you and for some others.

There exist claims of evidences. I know the nature of claims. They are easy to make, but evidence is something anyone should be able to examine, test and see for themselves the truth of.

If I say God spoke with me and felt confident in that truth, I would expect of myself the need to provide evidence you could test and answer any criticisms of that evidence to your satisfaction. Reasonable criticisms. I understand there may be a point where your criticisms become unreasonable, but I think I'd had to justify the claim of them being unreasonable as well.

Yes for the others but for me the quran is a proof of God existence.

That's fine. Everyone has to decide for themselves the level of confidence necessary to accept something as true. For me it's being able to provide evidence of my claim which stands up to any criticism. If I can prove to someone who is skeptical of my claim something is true I'm going to have a lot of confidence in my claim.

Where I can't, then I need to reexamine the evidence to see any valid criticism I might have missed, before assuming God put you into a state of denial.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

We did. Lots of them.

We asked Muslims these questions about Sharia law, got answers, and many on this thread has shared them with you.

We got these answers by Muslims which explain why many feel that Islam often seems to produce bad or immoral ideas in its adherents.

I'm not sure why you made the thread if you are frustrated by the answers. Address this issue instead of ignoring it or deflecting or calling people unknowledgable . . . and I have a feeling it will get better for you.

No the dumb questions were about punishment not about whether you can drink coca cola or smoke Hookah...You guys focused on punishment. I answered it. A lot of you focused on beheadings because I'm sure you've seen Daaesh or ISIS and think their view of Shari'ah Law is accurate. A lot of you thought Osama Bin Laden who wanted to conquer the world which is where the whole Shari'ah Law scare came from, was meant for everyone, I've explained briefly what I know about Shari'ah Law you continue to reject it. So from now on from you please refrain from responding because you are still ignorant despite my links towards you explaining Shari'ah ah. You want to be defiant so there I nothing more I can say so I'd rather avoid you. Perhaps in another discussion we can talk but here I'm drawing the line.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I don’t blame you. It is indefensible.

No. For one I'm not a lawyer. Two, many of you are too stupid to undertsnad it as it expands beyond punishment and that punishment and the execution of it differs in schools of thought. Three, punishment does not define Shari'ah Law. You guys need to stop watching news.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

In the modern age the Prophetical documents have had limited success as relics. The manuscripts that have surfaced were dismissed early on by Western scholars as forgeries based on historical considerations and palaeographical grounds,

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/77783/smirza_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

You're kind of stuck having to prove this documents were actually written by Muhammad vs simply accepting this to be true.

Doctors have scribes that dictate what such and such patient's condition is......Not stuck, where? You forget I work at a hospital.