• 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!

Ask About Islam

joelr

Well-Known Member
@KWED

Then he asked: O Muhammad, how is it that sometimes a child resembles his maternal uncle and not the paternal uncle? And sometimes he resembles his paternal uncle and not the maternal? He (S) said: He resembles one whose fluid is dominant over the other.


. Aristotle suggested instead that the (nonphysical) form-giving principle of an organism was transmitted through semen (which he considered to be a purified form of blood) and the mother's menstrual blood, which interacted in the womb to direct an organism's early development.


Pretty sure that any early scientific concepts you find in the Quran are going to be known to an even greater degree in ancient Greek culture.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Yes I can.
I know it is circular logic. That is my argument.
Not sure you know what "circular logic" means.

I only believe those that can show me that they can speak inside the circle.
If they dont speak inside the circle then they are just making things up. They are alone and not part of the group that speaks as one.

Mohammad speaks inside the circle. So I have accepted him as a prophet.

But Baha'u'llah does not speak inside the circle. Even though he says he speaks for God his words show he is not a prophet. He uses religious wording but doesnt show he knows the circle.

True prophets speak in symbols.
Their words are symbolic but not open to interpretation. They mean what they say.

They are all speaking symbols into positions of the circle.
Ok, I'll play.
How do you know that Muhammad is a prophet who speaks for god inside the circle? What independent, corroborative evidence can you present to support your claim?
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
. Aristotle suggested instead that the (nonphysical) form-giving principle of an organism was transmitted through semen (which he considered to be a purified form of blood) and the mother's menstrual blood, which interacted in the womb to direct an organism's early development.
Pretty sure that any early scientific concepts you find in the Quran are going to be known to an even greater degree in ancient Greek culture.
Many of these "scientific miracles" in the Quran seem to rely on the principle that no one knew anything about anything before the Quran.

One of my favourites is that "the Quran describes the earth as a sphere, when this is something only recently discovered by western science".
Not only does the Quran not describe the earth as round* but Erastosthenes described the earth as round nearly 1000 years before the Quran was written. Not only that, but he also calculated its circumference fairly accurately.

* The Quran says that Allah "spread out" the surface of the earth. The word used for "spread out" in Arabic is also used to describe how an ostrich clears a patch of ground to lay its eggs. Some dishonest proselytiser then decided that this meant the Quran was describing the earth as "like an ostrich egg". However, in another passage it says Allah spread out the earth "like a carpet" which might suggest a flat earth view.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
..and you know that how?
Are you a renowned scholar or something?
They are on record as saying it, would you like a link to one of their "warriors" raping a 12 year old captive, and explaining it he was allowed to to do it according to Islam? He prayed before and after the rape. <LINK>

Just as with the bible there are pernicious ideas from a more brutal and archaic age in the Quran, and citing it as a moral guide is a very dangerous idea. Since just as some adherents will cherry pick out the pernicious texts, or try to wave them away, others will not, or even prefer to focus on them.

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."

Voltaire
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
First of all, if we say our value is purely subjectively us giving ourselves value, then if someone values us less, and we value ourselves more, what is our true value? If we decide we are the most important person in the world, do we automatically become the most important person in the world?

Do we set our value so if I want to make myself so great in my eyes, then automatically I can do this?

Obviously, we have don't simply assign value to ourselves, but when we judge, we do so with some sort of guesstimate at our true value. We all believe there is a measurement to who we are.

...and that they may know their Lord encompasses everything in number. (Quran)

Our value whatever it is, is not maintained by our perceptions. But we know it requires perception. As it requires perception, there has to be an objective perception who maintains that value.

How do we see it? We can see that we aren't made of some sort of unique value that is totally different then a value in another being, like one human is of totally different type x value and another human being is of y value, and x and y have nothing really in common. There is something binding us. There is something in all this. That something, in the words of Imam Ali, is expressed:

"He is in all things without being merged in them neither separate from them"

The different hues of value, the different forms, the different relationships established through it, are all manifestations of a greater value, a link to something greater, an absolute source and basis, an eternal reality.

As objective value cannot be arbitrary, it follows it's eternal and not something God can create out of nothing. Rather he creates through the truth of vision of himself for witnesses all things in himself.

Naturally we can all see this. That for example, there is something extra special about love. When we value a person to the degree we love them, we are bonding with "value" and valuing in a special way, that transcends and points to something special.

These signs of value, from honor, to courage, to compassion, to affection, are all signs of something greater. Something that these things are emerging from, but are depending to manifest.

That in thing lives inside of us "he is all things..."but he isn't merged into us neither is he separate from us.

The signs point in a way, in which they link to perfection, to one essence, that unites them all in a single absolute reality. They point to transcendence that doesn't lack a single possible existence or praise or beauty or glory or greatness or anything to be valued. The Ultimate Value by which all value emerges from.

This is one of the reflections of Quran "Or are they created from nothing...", contrary to what people might think, this verse is clearly not saying that anyone believes nothing existed and then creation emerged from that. Some humans believe that universe was eternal, however this verse is addressing the polytheists, do they think their essence is created from nothing, their souls are just created by God from nothing. Rather, he created it from water of his own light, his own value, and created through his name/face/light.

Now this explanation of the name of God/face of God the true reality of the human being, how can we know it to be true? This takes sincere reflection upon which we realize that value is not something we simply make up or biological brain assigns and maintains.

Aside from this is how our positive or negative actions play a role in our value. As said before, we don't simply decide we are the best people on earth, and hence become the best person on earth.

There is a value to who we are. When do actions, we inherit it. Our value is actually increased or decreased. We don't decide the degree of that measurement. Sure we may think of ourselves at that moment and have our over all judgement of ourselves, but we all realize if Hitler thinks he is righteous it doesn't make him what he values of himself automatically the true value of himself. His actions degrade him, they put on the negative scale, in - side of zero, not on the positive.

There is something making us inherit our actions, a judge that perceives who we are, because this qualitive type measurement can only be maintained by quality type perception.

It's not like a rock, it has weight, but it doesn't matter if we measure it or not, this is qualitive, in which it depends on perception of who we are and maintaining that and making us inherit our actions.

And so these type of reminders, that we do believe that there is some sort living record to who we are, that it forms the true nature of value of ourselves, even if we underestimate or overestimate ourselves, there is an objective value.

We know these to be true, and would not be able to subjectively value ourselves without belief there is an objective value.

We see these signs in ourselves and in the horizons, pointing to something Greater. Something in which is the source of all it and unites all possible levels of value.

The only way to measure it is to gain vision from the vision of the Creator, the closer it is to the vision of the absolute, the closer it is to making right judgement.

However we all been given a degree of that judgement or would not be able to condemn the likes of Saddam or praise the likes of Mandela.

When we do good acts we are in a state, there is beauty to it if good, we inherit that beauty. The truth is there infinite beauties, but there is beauty that unites all beauty, and there is souls that are upon that united beauty. It's they who manifest God the most, reminding us of God's unity thereby. But we can never grasp their value in that way God values them, because only God can see himself.

Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq (as) said: "Surely, we have revealed it on the Night of value." (97:1) The night is Fatima al-Zahra, and the Value is God. Whoever recognizes Fatima in her rightful manner will have comprehended the Night of Value. She was named Fatima because the Creation has been prevented (fatamu) from recognizing her [fully]."


No, we do not "know" this to be true.
- "We know these to be true, and would not be able to subjectively value ourselves without belief there is an objective value." -
These are claims. None of this is remotely close to a proof for a deity. In fact it almost demonstrates there is definitely no such thing because objective truths are no longer even believed outside of religious fundamentalism.
There are several branches of philosophy that deal with this, for one -

"Søren Kierkegaard is generally considered to have been the first existentialist philosopher. He proposed that each individual—not society or religion—is solely responsible for giving meaning to life and living it passionately and sincerely, or "authentically".

But your objective truth is that Allah is God and his words are written down is NOT true for about 2/3 of all religious believers. That demonstrates that truth is subjective right there. The Quran says Christians and Jews follow nothing true and will be judged at the end times. Apocalypticism and judgment followed by resurrection are not accurate models of reality. But this pleading to some ultimate judge is not supported by evidence and is not supported by any reasonable branch of philosophy. This is theism. There is nothing here that secular philosophy cannot explain and provide better routes for daily living. This is just hijacking the fact that there is some source, probably nature, and values and judgments come from our minds.
It's slightly more philosophical than Christianity but that's because humans were beginning to philosophize a bit despite the dark ages.

"the closer it is to the vision of the absolute, the closer it is to making right judgement." yet 2/3 of all believers do not believe what you believe are words from God? So if every religion thinks they are doing what's "most right" then how does this help humanity? Claims like that should require absolute evidence and no religion has any good evidence at all?
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
But under Islam a Muslim man can buy a female slave, have sex with her, and then sell her (which the law considers to be the same thing).
That's absurd.
..just because Muslims and Christians colonised, and enslaved others, it doesn't make it morally acceptable..
Neither Islam or Christianity encourages oppression of others.

The trouble is, not everybody in the world have good intentions.
Mankind are often violent in their love of wealth, and in these circumstances, Muslims are not instructed to be pacifists, and allow the deniers of righteousness a way against them.

Naturally, those who have enmity against each other can't be trusted.
When people are killing each other, the "rules" go out of the window.

People here in the UK, have had personal experience of all kinds of bombs dropped on their towns and cities in WWII.
The thing about war crimes, is that the victors get to say who is guilty and who is not.
i.e. we all rely on G-d, eventually
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
Many of these "scientific miracles" in the Quran seem to rely on the principle that no one knew anything about anything before the Quran.

One of my favourites is that "the Quran describes the earth as a sphere, when this is something only recently discovered by western science".
Not only does the Quran not describe the earth as round* but Erastosthenes described the earth as round nearly 1000 years before the Quran was written. Not only that, but he also calculated its circumference fairly accurately.

* The Quran says that Allah "spread out" the surface of the earth. The word used for "spread out" in Arabic is also used to describe how an ostrich clears a patch of ground to lay its eggs. Some dishonest proselytiser then decided that this meant the Quran was describing the earth as "like an ostrich egg". However, in another passage it says Allah spread out the earth "like a carpet" which might suggest a flat earth view.

I keep hearing about all this science in the Quran and I haven't seem anything yet? I have seen non-believers = painful doom.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Sheldon said:
Well if you are going to assert that simply having a claim written in a book, is a record of something, then we have a record of Frodo travelling to Mordor and destroying the one ring. Do you believe that really happened? There were witnesses after all, as Frodo had several companions "in the book".
I believe those that speak with mythical accuracy.

How is "mythical accuracy" measured exactly? Is it supported by corroborative objective evidence?
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
They are on record as saying it..
Mmm .. many people claim to be in favour of democracy, while in fact they are hypocrites.
They are in favour of a particular "flavour" of govt. and if they don't get their own way, behave immorally.
This happens on all sides of the political spectrum.
 

WonderingWorrier

Active Member
How is "mythical accuracy" measured exactly? Is it supported by corroborative objective evidence?

It is measured by word connection. The stacking of symbols (like mythical creatures part this and part that). The more connections the stronger the reputation.

And their keywords must fit into the 12 gates.

Edit:
3 classes, 4 Directions, 3 positions in each of the 4 directions. Total 12 directions.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
That's absurd.
I know it sounds awful, but it is all there in the Quran and sunnah.
Now, I admit that it does seem somewhat strange if it was written by a most merciful, just and beneficent god - but it makes perfect sense if it was written by 7th century Arabs (see my "Quran Challenge" thread).

..just because Muslims and Christians colonised, and enslaved others, it doesn't make it morally acceptable..
I agree. But Allah permitting something or Muhammad doing something does make it morally acceptable, Islamically speaking.

Neither Islam or Christianity encourages oppression of others.
Unfortunately, both contain elements that are inherently oppressive. How else would you describe slavery?
Are you familiar with the concept of "dhimmi"? It is a non-Muslim whose country has been invaded and occupied by Islamic forces.
When Muhammad said "I have been commended to fight the people until they submit to Islam", how is that not oppression?

The trouble is, not everybody in the world have good intentions.
Mankind are often violent in their love of wealth, and in these circumstances, Muslims are not instructed to be pacifists,
Indeed. Allah encouraged the accumulation of land and wealth from non-Muslims. By the time of his death, Muhammad and his armies had invaded and conquered a large part of the Arabian peninsula.

Naturally, those who have enmity against each other can't be trusted.
Quran 60:4 says that "enmity and hatred towards non-Muslims is a good example for believers to follow". Does that mean that those Muslims who follow Allah's advice are not to be trusted?

When people are killing each other, the "rules" go out of the window.
So the "rules of war" do not apply during war?

People here in the UK, have had personal experience of all kinds of bombs dropped on their towns and cities in WWII.
The thing about war crimes, is that the victors get to say who is guilty and who is not.
Not necessarily. Just look at things like the Colton statue issue. And it is generally accepted that some of the stuff done by the Allies in WW2 amount to war crimes (like the area bombing of Dresden).

Certainly, some of the things Muhammad did are classed as war crimes today.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
I keep hearing about all this science in the Quran and I haven't seem anything yet? I have seen non-believers = painful doom.
I have analysed a fair few of the "Quran scientific miracle" claims and they all range from nonsense to utter nonsense. The sad thing is that someone has deliberately made up stuff that they know to be nonsense, and fed it to credulous people eager for confirmation and validation. It's basically a confidence trick.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
It is measured by word connection. The stacking of symbols (like mythical creatures part this and part that). The more connections the stronger the reputation.

And their keywords must fit into the 12 gates.

Edit:
3 classes, 4 Directions, 3 positions in each of the 4 directions. Total 12 directions.
Have you met brother @Link ?
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Or a child of say 9 years old, just for the record.
Unfortunately, "consent" is not a concept in Islam.
“A male owner of a female slave has the right to sexual access to her. Though he could not physically harm her without potentially being held legally accountable if she complained, her 'consent' would be meaningless since she is his slave.” - Professor Jonathan Brown, Islamic scholar
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Mmm .. many people claim to be in favour of democracy, while in fact they are hypocrites.
They are in favour of a particular "flavour" of govt. and if they don't get their own way, behave immorally.
This happens on all sides of the political spectrum.
Fortunately none of this happens in a theocracy - or a dictatorship - but where it might be difficult to separate them. :oops:
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Mmm .. many people claim to be in favour of democracy, while in fact they are hypocrites.
They are in favour of a particular "flavour" of govt. and if they don't get their own way, behave immorally.
This happens on all sides of the political spectrum.
Your analogy fails because the act of using female captives for sex is explicitly allowed in the Quran and sunnah. Obviously you don't agree with using female captives for sex (who would!?) but that is irrelevant to what Islam allows.
The actual hypocrisy is claiming that the Quran is perfect and timeless, and that Muhammad is the ultimate role model, and then rejecting things they said and did.
 
Top