As I read the Quran, which parts should I ignore?

[muhammad_isa]

..The fact that the immoral choice was an option, and one for centuries, shows that slavery was fully supported by Islam. Not only that but it was morally acceptable..

It's more morally acceptable than adultery, theft or murder, that's for sure!

..If a master can provide for a slave(s), a master can freely provide for the same amount of free people..

That's rubbish .. it's rather like saying that an employer can afford to pay their staff for doing nothing.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Hi Smart_Guy,

Back to the OP, the sentence of yours that I bolded makes it seems like we cannot ignore any of the Quran's messages? It really does seem to me that, put together, all of the claims of Islam end up contradicting each other. That's why I put the list in the OP together - to try to determine which of the contradictory claims non-Muslims should believe, and which they can ignore.

This is all in the spirit of understanding. It's not my fault that Islam's messages self-contradict. It's on Muslims to either be misunderstood, or clear things up.

Yes, I see your point. I do believe Islam is perfect but don't claim it, as in I don't say it out loud with radicalism and don't mind other views on it. It is also not my fault that Islam's messages seem to contradict with each other to you

I personally do not see a contradiction in being a religion, a law and a way of life. What I meant was that Islam is not just spiritual, but philosophical and practical too. But that's just me, mind you.

And yes, there are things one can ignore. If one cannot come to Makkah to perform Hajj for example, they you can ignore the fifth pillar of Islam in practice. They will still not be held responsible for that.

I wish I were knowledgeable enough to try to talk about it, but I'm not. Those who do not have it, cannot give it (a rough translation of an Arabic proverb). Don't wanna give wrong details, and if by a chance you are convinced (let's just pretend it) with something I explained that happens to be wrong, then I would have made it worse to Islam and maybe to humanity.

I was actually invited by a friend to this thread to try and help (he's not Muslim). Please forgive my ignorance and lack of knowledge (both of you).

 

[icehorse]

Hey Smart_Guy,

I always appreciate our exchanges! So, I'm re-posting the list from the OP here. As I read the Quran, these were some of the notes I took. These are summaries, not meant to be perfect translations, but I was trying to capture the spirit of the ideas. As I said in the OP, the ideas listed below were not just mentioned once or twice. Almost all of them are repeated many times.

So do you believe that these are valid ideas in Islam?:

- 1:7 - Allah is forever angry with Christians and Jews
- 2:106 - Some verses can be abrogated (replaced), by later verses.
- 2:178 - Slavery is ok.
- 2:193 - Fight non-believers until there are no non-believers.
- 2:216 - Participate in violent Jihad even if you don't want to.
- 2:223 - Have sex with your wife whenever YOU want to.
- 3:118 - 3:120 - Non-believers are not to be trusted - in many ways
- 3:157 - Dying as a martyr is a great idea.
- 4:89 - Kill apostates
- 5:45 - Eye for an eye, life for a life
- 5:57 - Don't criticize religion
- 6:60 - You can be guilty of thought crimes
- 7:166 - Think of Jews as monkeys
- 8:73 - Create a caliphate
- 9:1 - Break treaties with non-believers
- 9:29 - Fight and subdue non-believers, have them pay the jizyah
- 13:41 - Keep taking the lands of the non-believers
- 23: 6 - Wives and slaves are possessions
- 24:8 - Ways for wives to avoid stoning
- 24:60 - Old women shouldn't expect to get married
- 25:53 - Fresh water and salt water don't mix
- 29:28 - Sodomy is the worst sin
- 31:6 - Music and singing are discouraged
- 47:35 - Don't ask for peace if you have the upper hand
- 57:10 - Conquerers get the best reward
- 68:9 - Non-believers will hope for compromise - don't compromise with them
- 86:13 - Laws are in the Quran

 

[Smart_Guy]

Yes, I referred back to the OP. As the Quran is a unit that has to be taken as a whole, this needs to be done by someone that knows the Quran well, and the best choice is someone that memorizes it more. The reason behind this is the vocabulary used in the Quran, as some key words are used in synonyms/contexts I do not know. I'm not like that, so my best chance is to make extensive researches of the verses that connect to each other and give a comprehensive idea of each of those points. Remember also that in my views some points are given details in hadeeth.

I'll go over them and see what I can do. But don't expect much from me. I came to RF for fun in the first place.

 

[icehorse]

Yes, I referred back to the OP. As the Quran is a unit that has to be taken as a whole, this needs to be done by someone that knows the Quran well, and the best choice is someone that memorizes it more. The reason behind this is the vocabulary used in the Quran, as some key words are used in synonyms/contexts I do not know. I'm not like that, so my best chance is to make extensive researches of the verses that connect to each other and give a comprehensive idea of each of those points. Remember also that in my views some points are given details in hadeeth.

I'll go over them and see what I can do. But don't expect much from me. I came to RF for fun in the first place.

Hi Smart_Guy,

I don't mean to put a big burden on you. I'm just curious to know whether - from a common knowledge perspective - Muslims believe these ideas are correct and Islamic. So it's not so much about research. It's more about learning what beliefs are commonly held.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

I'd like to gain a basic understanding of Islam. I'm not thinking of signing up anytime soon, but it's worth understanding. I've been at it for a couple of years now and I've found it to be hard to pin down. I'm often told that I'm "misinterpreting" parts, or that I lack historical perspective or this or that...

So here are some ideas I found in the Quran, and my guess is that I'll be told I should ignore them, that they are not part of the "true Islam", even though we see many Muslims in the world pursuing these ideas:

- 1:7 - Allah is forever angry with Christians and Jews
- 2:106 - Some verses can be abrogated (replaced), by later verses.
- 2:178 - Slavery is ok.
- 2:193 - Fight non-believers until there are no non-believers.
- 2:216 - Participate in violent Jihad even if you don't want to.
- 2:223 - Have sex with your wife whenever YOU want to.
- 3:118 - 3:120 - Non-believers are not to be trusted - in many ways
- 3:157 - Dying as a martyr is a great idea.
- 4:89 - Kill apostates
- 5:45 - Eye for an eye, life for a life
- 5:57 - Don't criticize religion
- 6:60 - You can be guilty of thought crimes
- 7:166 - Think of Jews as monkeys
- 8:73 - Create a caliphate
- 9:1 - Break treaties with non-believers
- 9:29 - Fight and subdue non-believers, have them pay the jizyah
- 13:41 - Keep taking the lands of the non-believers
- 23: 6 - Wives and slaves are possessions
- 24:8 - Ways for wives to avoid stoning
- 24:60 - Old women shouldn't expect to get married
- 25:53 - Fresh water and salt water don't mix
- 29:28 - Sodomy is the worst sin
- 31:6 - Music and singing are discouraged
- 47:35 - Don't ask for peace if you have the upper hand
- 57:10 - Conquerers get the best reward
- 68:9 - Non-believers will hope for compromise - don't compromise with them
- 86:13 - Laws are in the Quran

For most of these verses that I mentioned, there are many similar verses to support them, so it's not just about misunderstanding single verses, these messages are "oft repeated".

If I were to think that Muslims believed in the messages in the Quran, this list would be quite alarming. But we're told over and over that Islam is a religion of peace.

Perhaps you see my dilemma here... What do Muslims value and believe?

note: sorry, got the first reference wrong, updated 1:1 to be 1:7

All of them. Engaging in religious barbarism because a book told you to do so is still religious barbarism.

 

[Union]

Brackets are additions by the author. Here are the same verse without said addition

YUSUFALI: Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which Allah has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is Allah, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them),
PICKTHAL: And let those who cannot find a match keep chaste till Allah give them independence by His grace. And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), write it for them if ye are aware of aught of good in them, and bestow upon them of the wealth of Allah which He hath bestowed upon you. Force not your slave-girls to whoredom that ye may seek enjoyment of the life of the world, if they would preserve their chastity. And if one force them, then (unto them), after their compulsion, lo! Allah will be Forgiving, Merciful.
SHAKIR: And let those who do not find the means to marry keep chaste until Allah makes them free from want out of His grace. And (as for) those who ask for a writing from among those whom your right hands possess, give them the writing if you know any good in them, and give them of the wealth of Allah which He has given you; and do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, when they desire to keep chaste, in order to seek the frail good of this world's life; and whoever compels them, then surely after their compulsion Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Interesting, none say nay at all. In fact Ive looked at six different translations none say nay. I guess if you ignore every other translations you would have a point. However sadly I have seen 6, cited 3, which support my point.

Actually if a verse contains slavery in the form of emancipation or as a punishment of the masters crimes it is an endorsement of slavery. If it was no there would be no slave to free nor slave to use as a fine. Freeing of slaves is not done for the slave or community but for brownie point for the master. This is no more a verse about forbidding slavery than a verse about charity is an endorsement of socialism

I didn't change the translation nor I manipulate anything . In the bracket what I put ( and it is my own insertion - as an Arabic literate person) to explain you what that conjunction 'Wa' really means . This verse has a specific grammatical pattern to ponder and I was explaining you this in my last post .

16:75

and 2:176. In one Allah clearly favours the believer over the slave. In the other the slave is property which can be seized as a fine for the crimes of the master. If slavery was not condoned neither would make sense. 2:176 especially. Heard of the Baqt treaty in which 360 slaves were given to the Islamic Empire. Run away slaves were to be extradited. Why were runs away slaves to be returned if freedom was easy to acquire. Seems like we have a contradiction of your modern views and a treaty made in 641 by the brother of Uthman and one that accept Islam from the Prophet directly.

No need to find a verse spelling it out. Maybe you lack the ability to read in depth, cross reference verses, history and ahadith but I do not. Especially when there are verse which directly state a slave is property and legal within the state. Open a history book once and a while... your ignorance of Islamic history is appalling


Hilarious. You need tradition to even put forward the idea that the Quran is from Allah. Tradition to even put forward it has not been altered. Of course feel free to disregard tradition when it shows how odd Islam's moral compass is in comparison to today's values. However this is cherry picking and fallacious, you only convince yourself.

OP concerns the Qur'anic teachings and its values , hence History , Hadith and Sirah are not within the scope , at least for this thread .

However regarding the two verses of Qur'an that you mentioned , I didn't find anything related to slavery in verse 2.176 . About 16.75 - this is not a factual statement to belittle the slaves rather a symbolic example to clarify the statement of verse 16.73 .

[016:073] And they serve besides Allah that which does not control for them any sustenance at all from the heavens and the earth, nor have they any power.
[016:074] Therefore do not give likenesses to Allah; surely Allah knows and you do not know.[016:075] Allah sets forth a parable: (consider) a slave owned, (who) has no power over anything, and one whom We have granted from Ourselves a goodly sustenance so he spends from it secretly and openly; are the two alike? (All) praise is due to Allah! Nay, most of them do not know.

Hence in verse 16.75 the owned slaves are actually the false gods in verse 16.73 who do not have any power and can't provide sustenance to anybody .

 

[icehorse]

All of them. Engaging in religious barbarism because a book told you to do so is still religious barbarism.

Not quite understanding your context here?...

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Not quite understanding your context here?...

Ignore every verse you have posted here. Violence in the name of God is inexcusabele.

 

[icehorse]

Ignore every verse you have posted here. Violence in the name of God is inexcusabele.

I'm not attempting to follow Islam, I'm attempting to understand what Muslims believe.

 

[Shad]

I understand. I see that we are going in circles here as I talked about all of the above before. I don't have more to say, so I'll go back to our previous posts maybe I'll find something convincing.

Thank you for sharing your views, and I apologize if I sounded rude somewhere between the lines.

You talked about. I am telling you why I find it unconvincing and how your own arguments can be used against you and Islam. I was trying to point out you are not thinking your arguments through.

You were not rude so not need to apologize

 

[Shad]

It's more morally acceptable than adultery, theft or murder, that's for sure!

Do not make it right nor moral especially when there are two alternative fully available yet are ignored

That's rubbish .. it's rather like saying that an employer can afford to pay their staff for doing nothing.

No it is not, you never thought it through or lack the ability to do so. A master owning a slave will have the resources for shelter and food for said slave. Otherwise the slave would die due to the environment or starvation. However since the master has these resources this means he/she could give it freely as charity rather than enslaving someone. What does a slave do? Slaves work, hence there is work available. So there is no justification for slavery given the above except that it was sanctioned by Allah and seen as moral. Which makes Allah and Islam immoral for this concept. There are two alternative which are moral yet Islam provides a 3rd immoral option and makes laws/rule about it.

It is not rubbish since the concept of charity is supposed to take care of the poor. So charity is rubbish? If a charity demands works from the one receiving it it is no longer charity. The third pillar of Islam is rubbish? You also equivocate that being charitable is similar to paying an employee for doing nothing, yet it is not the same. You are showing fallacious thinking. If a master has the mentioned resources they can pay an employee rather than taking a person as a slave. If a master has these resources they could be used for charity. Hence there are two available options besides slavery which requires the same resources used for a slave but are not immoral. The fact that slavery was even considered show it was acceptable by Islam and Allah, thus not immoral. However since slavery is immoral either Allah is immoral or Islam is made by a man which has no greater of a moral compass than others from the 7th century.

 

[psychoslice]

Heh

I'm not really frustrated at him here because of religion. I told him about that Taqiyyah point many times before and again now all he did was saying I was wrong because I was lying. Let alone his provoking and accusing posts all over. So many such posts of his were reported and deleted.

But now that you mentioned it, I guess I did sound rude to him. I'll have to apologize.

No, I didn't mean you were rude, not at all, in fact the other was rude.

 

[Shad]

I didn't change the translation nor I manipulate anything . In the bracket what I put ( and it is my own insertion - as an Arabic literate person) to explain you what that conjunction 'Wa' really means . This verse has a specific grammatical pattern to ponder and I was explaining you this in my last post .

You just admitted you modified it while denying you modified it. Also this modification is not found in any major translations so there is no reason for me to accept your translation over professions. If there was such a pattern other classical Arabic speakers would have done so but have not. Standard Arabic is not Classical Arabic so you knowledge is meaningless. Again I have no reason to accept your view while I have dozens of translations which disagree and agree with me. Lexicons for Arabic and Quran Arabic agree with me.

OP concerns the Qur'anic teachings and its values , hence History , Hadith and Sirah are not within the scope , at least for this thread .

The treaty is history.... The treaty was made before sirah and hadith. I guess you never bothered to look at it otherwise you would have figured this out. It says a lot about the Quran that people with direct communication with the Prophet, and brother to one of Islams future leaders had no issues with slavery. I never cited a hadith nor sirah...

My comment about hadiths is about my research, I never cited one as proof.

However regarding the two verses of Qur'an that you mentioned , I didn't find anything related to slavery in verse 2.176 . About 16.75 - this is not a factual statement to belittle the slaves rather a symbolic example to clarify the statement of verse 16.73 .

My fault, it should of been 2:178 and 2:177. Fat finger syndrome and not double checking. It takes the concept as an accepted comparison yet fails in the attempt. Slaves are real regardless of the power they may or may not have while the idols are seen as false gods which do not exist at all.

[016:073] And they serve besides Allah that which does not control for them any sustenance at all from the heavens and the earth, nor have they any power.
[016:074] Therefore do not give likenesses to Allah; surely Allah knows and you do not know.[016:075] Allah sets forth a parable: (consider) a slave owned, (who) has no power over anything, and one whom We have granted from Ourselves a goodly sustenance so he spends from it secretly and openly; are the two alike? (All) praise is due to Allah! Nay, most of them do not know.

The parable sets the stage that believers are like slaves and Allah is the master. This highlights the type of thinking that slavery is a useful concepts in order to communicate ideas and that
such a dynamic between the two is acceptable. Allah is the master, everything else is the slave. You merely ignore this this dynamic while in reality it is an endorsement of slavery. Read a few Tafsirs on the verses.

Hence in verse 16.75 the owned slaves are actually the false gods in verse 16.73 who do not have any power and can't provide sustenance to anybody .

Yet the parable fails as many concepts which are considered false Gods do have power over believers. The false doctrine of Jesus as part of the Trinity has power over Christians. Hindu scripture and Gods have power over Hindus, etc. It also provides authority which is not demonstrated any more than idol Gods in my view.

The parable is fallacious as it is a false analogy which is a fallacy.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Hi Smart_Guy,

I don't mean to put a big burden on you. I'm just curious to know whether - from a common knowledge perspective - Muslims believe these ideas are correct and Islamic. So it's not so much about research. It's more about learning what beliefs are commonly held.

The thing is, I think I do ignore all (or at least most) of those verses for now. They seem to be secondary and only needed if we were looking for laws. Otherwise it wouldn't have confused me to give direct comments. Remember, what matters in Islam the most is believing God is the only one worthy of worship and Muhammad is his prophet and creation (not divine). Everything else can be dropped at some point, even prayers, the first thing people are asked for in the judgement day.

I'll see if I can go through them one by one.

You talked about. I am telling you why I find it unconvincing and how your own arguments can be used against you and Islam. I was trying to point out you are not thinking your arguments through.

You were not rude so not need to apologize

I understand. I'll go over it again and reflect about it.

No, I didn't mean you were rude, not at all, in fact the other was rude.

I didn't take it that way, no worries. I forgot to mention I was frustrated at his general behavior tho

I do feel guilty for being rude to him tho. That was my own conclusion really. But I think I'll still ignore him

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

I understand. I'll go over it again and reflect about it.

Do you think that Islam prohibits adultery ???

1. What is the temporary marriage ??
2 - Why is your called to( sex with slaves without marriage contract ???
iam write it in Arabic (وما ملكت ايمانكم )surat al -nesai

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

Omar bin Khattab position of marriage slaves ??
Very strange position ???
Source ( interpretation Baghawi ) ( Hussein Massoud between Baghawi )===
If the free collection of four women silks may , either slave is not permissible for him to marry more than two women at most of the scholars , told Abdul Wahab bin Ahmed al-Khatib , I Abdul Aziz bin Ahmed sorts , I Abul Abbas deaf , I spring , I Shafi'i , I Sufian, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Rahman sire Abu Talha , Suleiman ibn Yasar , Abdullah bin threshold , Umar ibn al -Khattab may Allah be pleased with him , he said: marry the servant of two women called two shots and invoke the nation Lakedtin , the were not menstruate Vbashhreinn or a month and a half

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

The thing is, I think I do ignore all (or at least most) of those verses for now. They seem to be secondary and only needed if we were looking for laws. Otherwise it wouldn't have confused me to give direct comments. Remember, what matters in Islam the most is believing God is the only one worthy of worship and Muhammad is his prophet and creation (not divine). Everything else can be dropped at some point, even prayers, the first thing people are asked for in the judgement day.

I'll see if I can go through them one by one.

Well this issue is very important to you ( God is one )

Well -
I'd say God is one
Do you accept me this faith ???
the children of Israel say ( God is one )
The Koran announced this fact (sutat ( ( Yunus )
Do you accept them of this faith ???
Please answer loud and clear ???
It clear questions and simple questions
؟؟

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

The parable sets the stage that believers are like slaves and Allah is the master. This highlights the type of thinking that slavery is a useful concepts in order to communicate ideas and that
such a dynamic between the two is acceptable. Allah is the master, everything else is the slave. You merely ignore this this dynamic while in reality it is an endorsement of slavery. Read a few Tafsirs on the verses.

Christianity does not carry this concept !!!
The relationship between God and man is a kind of sharing love ??
1 - We say that God our Father
The son is not a slave to the Father
2 - Christian idea of abolition of slavery
3. In the spirit of the Spirit of God has the right to worship
4. Christianity does not bear the idea of authoritarian
5. Christian religion calls for peace through the concept of God's presence among us
This concept differs from the ideology of the Islamic ??
1. Islam is the enemy of God man says
( Surat al-Anfal , etc.)
2. The concept of hostility between God and man is at the heart of the Islamic ideology
3. I wish you could put this considerations of separation between Christianity and Islam in the core(important ) teachings

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

No, I didn't mean you were rude, not at all, in fact the other was rude.

My friend these words the commentators of the Koran ?
What do we do ??
This is a problem of the Koran ?
Did I say the wrong
Here are some sources ( about the meaning of the word Altkaah
1-) Are not believers take the unbelievers rather than believers and who does it is not of God in everything but the fatwa them Tqap God and Ihdhirkm himself to God and determination ( [ Al-Imran: 28] .
Ibn al-Qayyim may God have mercy on him , said:
" Pious slave says that contrary to what people think of prevention is hated it if it did not speak religiously sanctioned lying . "
Finished " provisions of the dhimmis " ( 2/1038 ) .
Saying: ( However, the fatwa Tqap any of them : ) , but he was afraid of some countries or in times of evil , he may not Atekayam phenomenon Bbatnh and intention ;
3 - said Sarkhasi in Mabsoot c 24 p. 45 ( ... and Hasan al-Basri God's mercy: the pious believer Prize to the Day of Resurrection ,
4
) Ghazali : the science of religion
)4- And this is true - as noted above - because the pious religion of the Koran, and the religion of the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him - grandfather of Imam al-Baqir , peace be upon him -