Ask About Islam

[Birdnest]

Yes it’s progress as slavery was abolished and sex between consenting adults is natural but I don’t think it’s as liberal as you have suggested.

"Natural" isn't necessarily good.

 

[joelr]

Allah swt says in the Quran that he created every living thing from water.

Yes that was a common creation story, It's from the Mesopotamian creation story -

"Genesis 1–11 as a whole is imbued with Mesopotamian myths.[17][21] Genesis 1 bears both striking differences from and striking similarities to Babylon's national creation myth, the Enuma Elish.[18] On the side of similarities, both begin from a stage of chaotic waters before anything is created, in both a fixed dome-shaped "firmament" divides these waters from the habitable Earth, and both conclude with the creation of a human called "man" and the building of a temple for the god (in Genesis 1, this temple is the entire cosmos)."
Genesis creation narrative - Wikipedia

If you want to debate evolution, please go to that thread to debate, I am not here to debate evolution. That is not what my thread is about.

Right except you denied the evolutionary process in this thread? So that's weird. Generally when you oppose some science that has ridiculous amounts of evidence, in a debate forum, then that's what it's about? But ok, not about that then.

In the Quran, there are many things that have shown true and are proven true. Embryology, Astronomy, waters, etc. I don't need scientific evidences to prove my belief in my Creator. It is all around if one can see.

In Islam, The Quran is a book of fact.

Right, astronomy and embryos existed when the Quran was written. People were beginning to form understandings of both. So if the Quran mentions something that was far beyond the science of the time, like neutron stars then great. Can you provide some evidence?
That's great that you have a belief and you think a book is a fact. There are over 1 billion Hindu who also have a belief and have a book of "facts". Same for Christianity. I'm not super interested in what your standards of evidence are, but ok? I'm asking for evidence. The thread is titled "Ask about Islam" and you answer to my query regarding evidence is you don't need scientific evidences.
Cool, neither do any religions.
They all also say they are all fact. So do you have any evidence?

 

[joelr]

If we have a soul, it would be evidence.

Uh huh. Except it seems that we don't have a soul. There are all types of brain damage cases resulting in different personalities and even different theologies. During surgery there is generally no consciousness experience at all. NDE are very rare but neurologists think it may be related to memories implanted while waking up. It's still very rare. Nothing suggests a spirit or soul.

 

[joelr]

Differences in morality is all attack on morality as well. If you don't believe morality, then yeah, there is no proof of God. But this argument is still strong because most people know morality exists and is not an illusion nor are we an illusion.

Of course morality doesn't exist? Yes we have evolutionary tendencies to care about people and such. But we make our morals up. I'm not as familiar with the Quran but I'm sure there are things that are ignored because culturally they are no longer acceptable. But this doesn't matter because there are more Christians, Hindu and other among religious believers. Since they worship false deities in your mind they are making up their morals as well. Most believers are following made up morals, made up by people because they are not following the Quran. So there you go, morals are an illusion for most people yet we still have a functioning world.

 

[KWED]

Yes I can use other miracle stories.

No, you can't, because it is the very existence of these miracles that you are attempting to demonstrate. That is basic circular logic.

 

[KWED]

Clearly, while we are alive, the two depend on one another.
That does not stop the concepts being distinct from each other.

So how does the soul survive when the physical brain dies.

Because the soul is altered by changes to the physical brain, the version of the soul that survives death and goes to heaven is presumably the one that existed just prior to death.

 

[KWED]

I was born and raised in the States and I was taught all too well of the history. Actually my ancestors are from the Cherokee tribe. Praying is a bit different than how Christians pray.

It is a prescribed way of praying. We recite Quran and do movements in bowing and prostration. Imagine a women praying in front of a man and making prostrations and say the man comes up and down and the women is bowing over and he imagines things (which men do)....it is not befitting a Muslim women to be in that situation nor should there be temptation for the man. In the Islamic prayer we keep our eyes open.

It's only common sense that men and women keep separate from praying next to each other. Men and women have attraction, desire and lust. BOTH and everyone knows this to be factual...men as well as women they try to impress, to gain attention etc. So, in Islam, that is eliminated.

If a women prays alongside a man there must be a barrier in between them. Equality doesn't come into prayer. Prayer is taken very seriously in Islam and the more one has sincerity and concentrates on being in front of their Creator, the better it is for him/her. The men pray and it's MANDATORY for every Muslim man to go to the mosque 5 times a day. For women, it is better to pray in their homes.

Islam makes things easy for the women. Men have it harder.

Islam is also a prevention and a cure.

So women have to pray in a different room because Muslim men can't see a woman without thinking of sex.
Why do you think this isn't a problem for Christians or Hindus or atheists? What is it about Islam that makes men like this?

 

[KWED]

"What your right hand possesses" refers to slaves.

Do you consider slavery (owning another human as property) to be morally acceptable or unacceptable, in principle?

 

[KWED]

Doesn't inequality mean one party has what the other one doesn't?

Indeed. Gender segregation is not necessarily a sign of gender inequality (but it can be).
Inequality is things like a woman inheriting half what the equivalent male inherits, or a woman's awrah being the entire body rather than the man's knee to navel.

 

[KWED]

@Sheldon, what do you mean good and evil are subjective?

Islam considers slavery and torture to be morally acceptable. International law and the civilised world consider them to be morally unacceptable.

If such things are "objective", which position is objectively right, and which objectively wrong?

 

[KWED]

Mmm .. women regularly get violated in wars.

Yes, but under international law it is a war crime with serious penalties.
Under Islam is is a god-given right!

..notice, it is not allowed for a Muslim to rape a woman and "walk away" !

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).
Do you consider this to be morally acceptable, in principle?

 

[KWED]

But its allowed to rape slave women, its there in Quran

It may be classed as "rape" by today's laws and morality but it is considered "lawful intercourse" under Islam. And Islam is perfect and for all time and all people. Which is an obvious problem.

 

[KWED]

..and you know that how?
Are you a renowned scholar or something?

The Quran permits men to have sex with their female slaves and captives distributed from war booty.
There are several sahih hadith that record Muhammad allowing his men to use recently captured women for sex, even if they were married, and then selling them on for profit.

Therefore, if during conflict against non-Muslims, Muslim men take or are given female captives and use them for sex, and they claim that they are allowed to do it because the Quran and Muhammad say so, then they are following the Quran and Sunnah. It really is that simple.
Of course, you may disagree with Allah and Muhammad on this issue (I certainly hope you do, you have daughters!) but the Quran and sunnah are quite clear.

 

[KWED]

The taliban and Isis do not represent Islam.

They represent a literalist, retentionist interpretation of Islam. One which rejects any form of modernism or moderation in order to be more compatible with a changing world. Not all Muslims support such an interpretation, but it is an interpretation that is derived wholly from the Quran and sunnah and classical tafsir.
It is entirely understandable that many moderate Muslims are appalled by some of the actions of groups like ISIS, but unfortunately that means they would also have been appalled by some of the actions of Muhammad and the sahabah.

 

[KWED]

Plus they weren't slave girls. They were free women and children

Who were captured and distributed as "war booty", thus making them "what the right hand possesses" (slaves).

and they raped(which is FORBIDDEN)

You are mixing your concepts here. Having sex with your female captives is not "rape" under Islam. It is "lawful intercourse". There is no concept of "rape" (sex without consent) in Islam. The right of sexual access is granted by marriage or ownership.

AND they went against ISLAM.

Using female captives for sex is explicitly permitted by the Quran and sunnah. They were following Islam.

 

[KWED]

they hurt.....THAT IS AGAINST ISLAM. .

Islam prescribes a variety of painful tortures as punishments for minor offences and non crimes. And the agonising torments of hell are described in great detail in the Quran.
Hurting people is a fundamental part of Islam.

 

[KWED]

You can't do either in public.........
Both can be done in private.
You probably call it progress for "civilized" people to have intercourse with anyone anytime.

Erm, it is against the law in most countries to have sex in public view.
But I agree with you that it is "civilised" and "progress" to outlaw using female slaves and captives for sex. Shame that Islam cannot do the same.

 

[KWED]

Why not?

If you hand over your wallet to a mugger without a fight, is it still theft?

 

[KWED]

"Natural" isn't necessarily good.

Ok, so when is informed, freely consensual, adult sex, behind closed doors, not good?
And why is a man having sex with a female captive not bad?

 

[WonderingWorrier]

No, you can't, because it is the very existence of these miracles that you are attempting to demonstrate. That is basic circular logic.

Yes I can.
I know it is circular logic. That is my argument.
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.