Ask About Islam

[Sheldon]

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.

I know, every time I encounter one of these claims it turns out to be the most tenuous nonsense, being masqueraded as scientific knowledge that predates modern scientific discovery. It's risible every time. Not only that it hardly takes a genius to realise that if they had made those discoveries then science wouldn't have needed or been able to re-discover them centuries later.

In the school of idiotic apologetics, this one is one of the dumbest.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
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

Some even seem to still revel in such archaic misogyny, take a look at this drivel trying to justify the rape of slaves.

You think women are so turned off by a power imbalance? Actually it is the natural order of the world to this day that men have more power than women. Women seem to like powerful men in general.

 

[Sheldon]

So you think that women are turned on by being captive and powerless?
*smh*
Literally no words.

I know, I had read that a few times, suppressing waves of nausea, to be sure I wasn't misunderstanding.

 

[KWED]

But you know if you apply that methodology, it get's you an awful religion.

It gets you "Islam", but I agree that it is an awful religion.

So why not try an alternate route.

If you don't like the rules of the club you are in, perhaps it's time to find a new club rather than pretend the rules are different.
Imagine turning up at your golf club in football kit and trying to explain to the club secretary that "golf attire must be worn" doesn't actually mean that, but something completely different that allows football kit to be worn.

Hadiths - for every hadith that say x... there is a hadith that says not x.

I agree that Islamic scripture is often contradictory.

Scholars are condemned in Quran in the past versions of Islam (before Mohammad (s)) because they distorted, what makes you think the final version has scholars who did not?

So people who try to interpret the Quran are to be condemned and dismissed?
So I condemn and dismiss you.
There, that was easy!
(It is amusing how rarely apologists realise that their arguments work against themselves)

 

[muhammad_isa]

Does a husband need a wife's consent for sex? Yes or no? (Further refusal to answer will be taken as a "no")

..and this proves what exactly?
..that Muslims are barbarians who have no respect for women?
..please..

You keep saying that, but you don't seem to be able to come up with any explanation other than I don't consider sex outside marriage to be wrong (as long as it's informed, adult and consensual).

That's right .. you reject the Bible and Qur'an and think that you know it all.
Good luck with that.

Unless it is with a female slave or captive. And you consider that to be morally acceptable..

It's not really about what I find moral. It is about what Allah SWT has taught us in the Qur'an.
It is very likely that a man will be tempted to have illicit relations with his "secretary" if he spends time alone with them.
Islam does not allow men to have illicit relations, consent or no consent, They need to take responsibllity for their actions.

 

[Sheldon]

England my lionheart said: ↑
Oh we do listen but never really get a straight answer to direct questions about islam,apologetics and the no true Scotsmen fallacy aplenty but a straight answer no.

BULLCRAP.

That's hilarious irony fair play, deliberate one hopes?

 

[Link]

Some even seem to still revel in such archaic misogyny, take a look at this drivel trying to justify the rape of slaves.

This is part of what Ahlulbayt (a) talked about distortion in Quran, Sunnah and Shariah and Ahkaam. Slavery is a dark history we can't disconnect ourselves from. We have two choices:

(1) Cling to scholars who advocated it as allowed.
(2) Abandon our past forefathers ways in having it allowed and realize the awful crime it is, and the evil of those who allowed it.

As you know Quran says every Messenger was opposed by people saying "we found our forefathers on a way, and we are in walking in their tracks".

It's because Islam is based on reputation of scholars, and so their is sanctity around them, and no one wants to disavow themselves from them or severe the link to them, and investigate Islam different way then relying on them.

 

[KWED]

I know, I had read that a few times, suppressing waves of nausea, to be sure I wasn't misunderstanding.

On another forum, an apologist told me that the women who were taken as war booty by Muhammad's men did not only consent to the sex, but were grateful to them for killing their menfolk and releasing them from the bondage of polytheistic barbarism.

The cognitive dissonance knows no bounds!

 

[muhammad_isa]

Argumentum ad populum fallacy.

What's that supposed to mean?
Are you saying that 2 billion Muslims agree with ISIS .. or what?

 

[Link]

It gets you "Islam", but I agree that it is an awful religion.

If you don't like the rules of the club you are in, perhaps it's time to find a new club rather than pretend the rules are different.
Imagine turning up at your golf club in football kit and trying to explain to the club secretary that "golf attire must be worn" doesn't actually mean that, but something completely different that allows football kit to be worn.

I agree that Islamic scripture is often contradictory.

So people who try to interpret the Quran are to be condemned and dismissed?
So I condemn and dismiss you.
There, that was easy!
(It is amusing how rarely apologists realise that their arguments work against themselves)

I tried to find my path in new Age paganism kind of stuff before. Even a little mix of lefthanded ego trash spirituality. It was not for me.

Also, I know Quran is true. So it's about working with what I know. I know hadiths are hit and miss, and same with scholarly opinions, and so I don't over rely on them.

Scholars who speak without knowledge and mix falsehood with truth are to be condemned. I'm not a scholar but if I do that, you are to condemn me as well.

 

[Sheldon]

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

I don't know any way to simplify that statement.

Human rights is built on that premise that this is false but rather that morals are objective,

No they're not, that's just your subjective opinion. Human rights are built on a consensus of what constitutes unacceptable harm or suffering, and how best to protect general well being. Nor is that consensus universal, which rather destroys your assertion.

do you believe in human rights?

Believe in, what does that mean? Are you asking if I think all humans should have universal right? If so then yes, and i have a subjective opinion about what they should be, and guess what. I'd bet myself as a slave, that your religious beliefs would prompt you to subjectively oppose some of those rights, that I subjectively believe we should all have.

Good and bad are subjective concepts, it's astonishing anyone can believe otherwise, but yet they do. Then again people deny scientific facts like species evolution, so perhaps not that surprising.

 

[Link]

I don't know any way to simplify that statement.



No they're not, that's just your subjective opinion. Human rights are built on a consensus of what constitutes unacceptable harm or suffering, and how best to protect general well being. Nor is that consensus universal, which rather destroys your assertion.



Believe in, what does that mean? Are you asking if I think all humans should have universal right? If so then yes, and i have a subjective opinion about what they should be, and guess what. I'd bet myself as a slave, that your religious beliefs would prompt you to subjectively oppose some of those rights, that I subjectively believe we should all have.

Good and bad are subjective concepts, it's astonishing anyone can believe otherwise, but yet they do. Then again people deny scientific facts like species evolution, so perhaps not that surprising.

I took a philosophy of human rights course. It was taught by an Atheist professor. He believe morality was not subjective, and even one third of the course was just on that.

You are making the general mistakes a lot of people do. There is a deeper way to analyze the disputes of morality. It's simple, some of it is wrong, and some of it is right.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
Argumentum ad populum fallacy.

What's that supposed to mean?
Are you saying that 2 billion Muslims agree with ISIS .. or what?

I think I've wasted enough time trying to explain known common logical fallacies to you, if you still don't know what this one means, I suggest you go and educate yourself, since it has been a rather thankless task.

I've Googled it for you, since you seem to find this too difficult, <HERE's> a link.

 

[Sheldon]

I know Quran is true.

Scientific Errors in the Quran

Think again.

 

[Link]

Scientific Errors in the Quran

Think again.

I tell you what, you probably aware that spit fire is a fallacy as well. If you pick one or two you think you are sure are fallacies, I will respond. Otherwise, it's too time consuming.

 

[Sheldon]

I took a philosophy of human rights course. It was taught by an Atheist professor. He believe morality was not subjective, and even one third of the course was just on that.

Is it me?

You are making the general mistakes a lot of people do. There is a deeper way to analyze the disputes of morality. It's simple, some of it is wrong, and some of it is right.

So open to subjective interpretation then.

KMN...

 

[Link]

So open to subjective interpretation then.

KMN...

Not really. You don't understand this issue properly. I suggest taking any course that deals with the issue of morality.

 

[Link]

The problem Sheldon, is that you want the answers all at a superficial level. Go deeper. Go dive into it deeply.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
Scientific Errors in the Quran

Think again.

I tell you what, you probably aware that spit fire is a fallacy as well. If you pick one or two you think you are sure are fallacies, I will respond. Otherwise, it's too time consuming.

You've lost me sorry, what has that to do with you claiming the "Quran is true" when it contains obvious scientific errors?

 

[Link]

You've lost me sorry, what has that to do with you claiming the "Quran is true" when it contains obvious scientific errors?

You gave a big list. I suggest picking one or two, or otherwise it's spitfire fallacy to try to overwhelm with many claims instead of dealing with one or two. This is because the person may feel there is bound to be one that is right by sheer numbers, but this is proven to be a tactic, that is a fallacy as well.