Ask About Islam

[Sheldon]

I did answer

No you did not, and you have not answered again, just some red herring about rape being natural. I never asked you if rape were natural, I know it is natural. I asked you if you think it is ever moral for a husband to have sex with his wife, if she does not consent?

It seems you don't want to answer candidly.

 

[Sheldon]

Look, no one understands you because you make no sense.

It's not like we have been reticent or vague in telling him that either.

 

[KWED]

It seems you don't want to answer candidly.

It's the religious rock and a hard place often experienced by those forced to confront the implications of their beliefs in such contexts.
They can't criticise or condemn god or scripture, but at the same time they feel uncomfortable about supporting or condoning it in public. hence all the prevarication and deflection.

 

[Sheldon]

It's the religious rock and a hard place often experienced by those forced to confront the implications of their beliefs in such contexts.
They can't criticise or condemn god or scripture, but at the same time they feel uncomfortable about supporting or condoning it in public. hence all the prevarication and deflection.

Yes, sadly I've seen it all too often, and for too many years. Since the morals of most monotheistic religions belong to archaic patriarchal societies, it must take a fair amount of mental gymnastics to cope with the inevitable cognitive dissonance.

 

[WonderingWorrier]

No you did not, and you have not answered again, just some red herring about rape being natural. I never asked you if rape were natural, I know it is natural. I asked you if you think it is ever moral for a husband to have sex with his wife, if she does not consent?

It seems you don't want to answer candidly.

No. It is unacceptable to me personally.
But that is my own opinion. My decision.

Who am I to judge the actions of others. I can only judge myself.
Im sure a so called evil person does not think of themselves as evil.
One persons evil can be another persons good.

 

[WonderingWorrier]

If you meant that a woman should obey god, why did you say that she should obey her husband, given that the discussion was about women obeying husbands, not god?

Was the discussion was about scripture. Obey the husband. And in scripture God is the husband in the story. I showed a verse that says so.


For thy Maker is thine husband; the Lord of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called. Isaiah 54:5

So you are equating "it happens in the wild" with "morally acceptable"?
Yikes!

I was making a point.

 

[KWED]

No. It is unacceptable to me personally.
But that is my own opinion. My decision.

So you admit that you consider your own sense of morality to be superior to gods.
In which case, why is god worthy of worship?

 

[KWED]

Was the discussion was about scripture. Obey the husband. And in scripture God is the husband in the story. I showed a verse that says so.
For thy Maker is thine husband; the Lord of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called. Isaiah 54:5

So you are claiming that every time "husband" is mentioned in holy scripture, it actually means "god"?
Are you sure?

I was making a point.

And what was that point?

 

[Sheldon]

No. It is unacceptable to me personally.

Thank you for answering. Incidentally all morals are subjective.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

You can bring all the Greek you want.

That’s good, especially since much of our ability to read the Greek versions is due to Muslim copying books before Christians could burn them. If ancient Muslim scholars could quote Ancient Greek texts, why can’t you admit that the Greek texts came first?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Justice is very mature. It's immature to think we are unaccountable to God.

Forgiveness IS judgment.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

So you agree that morality is not objective and fixed. It is dependent on a variety of factors, including time and place.
You merely choose to adopt the moral system of 7th century Arabia. You could easily follow 14th century Meso-American or 17th century Portuguese morality.

I think it’s telling many people choose to follow ancient dead guys who can’t tell them they are wrong.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I wouldn't say that it is influencing my take on Islam, but rather it just confirms what Islam is.

My background in Christianity makes me understand where I came from and why I am not there anymore except only to help

I mean if you want to nitpick, where you came from is the Cherokee, right? Aren’t the Smokey Mountains proof Vulture made them? You lived in California, right? Aren’t the Rockies proof a blind Native warrior killed Unk Cegula and it’s vertebrae formed the Rockies? Native mythology has more truth in them than any Abrahamic scripture. I’ve never seen a man come from dirt but I’ve seen Coyote team up in hunts with Badger and trick the latter out of a meal.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

You believe that a man does not need his wife's consent to have sex with her.

I wonder if it swings both ways. After all, if consent isn’t needed, then rape is okay no matter the gender of the rapist.

 

[MyM]

That’s good, especially since much of our ability to read the Greek versions is due to Muslim copying books before Christians could burn them. If ancient Muslim scholars could quote Ancient Greek texts, why can’t you admit that the Greek texts came first?

Can you please give your proof as to what you are saying. The Quran isn't from any of that "Greek" stuff. I am not sayin anythin about what came first...am sure plenty of Greek scrolls and findings were there....that's not the point. It's the people who translated...they were not very good translators...they had to put together, use what resources they had and decipher when something starts and finishes and there was no English grammar back then, no capitalizations, no punctuations etc. so it would have been a very tedious task to undergo.

 

[MyM]

I mean if you want to nitpick, where you came from is the Cherokee, right? Aren’t the Smokey Mountains proof Vulture made them? You lived in California, right? Aren’t the Rockies proof a blind Native warrior killed Unk Cegula and it’s vertebrae formed the Rockies? Native mythology has more truth in them than any Abrahamic scripture. I’ve never seen a man come from dirt but I’ve seen Coyote team up in hunts with Badger and trick the latter out of a meal.

We don't believe in that. I actually found out that there were Muslim Cherokees as well as in other tribes.

Anyways, you have every right to believe what you believe but your word isn't written in stone.

 

[WonderingWorrier]

And what was that point?

That someone else understood the point.

I know it is natural.

Thank you for answering. Incidentally all morals are subjective.

Looks like he did understand.


You mentioned the wild.
Where do you think the wild is?

Do you really think we are not in the wild?
That societies of animals are different than us?
Yikes.

Perhaps you should take a DNA test from a single blade of grass and compare it to your own.
To help you discover who you are.

We are life taking many different forms (lifeforms) as we expand and adapt in different directions.
We are all the same. We are life. In the wild.

 

[WonderingWorrier]

So you are claiming that every time "husband" is mentioned in holy scripture, it actually means "god"?
Are you sure?

Take a closer look:

For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee. Isaiah 62:5



The words of the husband and wife are not heard.

And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived. Revelation 18:23


Just as the corn, the oil, and the wine are not heard.

And the earth shall hear the corn, and the wine, and the oil; and they shall hear Jezreel. Hosea 2:22




So what is this bridegroom and fasting nonsense that Jesus is talking about?

And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? as long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. Mark 2:19

But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days. Mark 2:20

You would have to know what fasting is to understand it.




The lamb is the wife:
Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. Revelation 19:9

The wine is the wife:
Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine by the sides of thine house: thy children like olive plants round about thy table. Psalm 128:3

Look at the table:
Cattle - Goats - Sheep
Corn - Oil - Wine

In the table the children are Olive/oil.

In the bible it is said it is olive oil (I could quote to confirm it)
Instead I'm going to show you that Mohammad knew about the oil.

"Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The Parable of His Light is as if there were a Niche and within it a Lamp: the Lamp enclosed in Glass: the glass as it were a brilliant star: Lit from a blessed Tree, an Olive, neither of the east nor of the west, whose oil is well-nigh luminous, though fire scarce touched it: Light upon Light! Allah doth guide whom He will to His Light: Allah doth set forth Parables for men: and Allah doth know all things".

He said "as it were a brilliant star":

Moon - Star - Sun
Corn - Oil - Wine

He knows what he is talking about


Like I said. God is the husband in the story.

For thy Maker is thine husband; the Lord of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called. Isaiah 54:5



Just like God is the father in the story.

Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. John 5:18

Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? John 10:36

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. John 20:17



The olive trees and the marriage of the lamb.
Does that make any sense to you?

Or are you still hearing nonsense.

 

[joelr]

Yes .. if we do the right thing.

War is hateful. It increases the suffering that people have to endure.
The problem is, if G-d teaches us [in scripture etc.] to never engage in war, those that wish evil against us will have no difficulty in their plight.

..so it becomes a debate about why G-d has allowed us to do whatever we like .. good or bad.

The correct understanding of "afterlife" is that if we live according to G-d's guidance, evil can be minimised .. in this life, and subsequently the next.
Neither communism or capitalism have ideologies that can achieve this. They both lead to greed, corruption and envy.

When the majority of wealth gets into the hands of a few, then enmity increases.
Mankind is weak .. we love wealth and power to our downfall.

The Bhagavad Gita is an entire philosophical discussion on the nature of war, framed as a discussion between Krishna and a prince.


All this stuff about God teaching stuff is pure speculation. As is a correct understanding of an afterlife. Just as Krishna didn't really speak wisdom to Arjuna no scripture is divine words from anything except people.
Political systems can lead to war but so can religions. Religions will war between each other as well as groups with different interpretations of scripture. There is a passage in the Quran that says to attack non-believers and some that say live and let live. So neither side would be completely correct or incorrect if trying to make a policy about peace or war.

 

[joelr]

Can you please give your proof as to what you are saying. The Quran isn't from any of that "Greek" stuff. I am not sayin anythin about what came first...am sure plenty of Greek scrolls and findings were there....that's not the point. It's the people who translated...they were not very good translators...they had to put together, use what resources they had and decipher when something starts and finishes and there was no English grammar back then, no capitalizations, no punctuations etc. so it would have been a very tedious task to undergo.

Not good translators? Are you actually making stuff up? At that time Islam was full of highly educated people in all fields. It's known that they picked up from Greek works and expanded on them.

Many classical works, including those of Aristotle, were transmitted from Greek to Syriac, then to Arabic, then to Latin in the Middle Ages. Aristotle's zoology remained dominant in its field for two thousand years.[v

scholars such as Al-Kindi[3] translated Indian, Assyrian, Sasanian (Persian) and Greek knowledge, including the works of Aristotle, into Arabic. These translations supported advances by scientists across the Islamic world.[4]

Medieval Islamic scientific achievements encompassed a wide range of subject areas, especially mathematics, astronomy, and medicine.[4] Other subjects of scientific inquiry included physics, alchemy and chemistry, ophthalmology, and geography and cartography.[6]

The Islamic Golden Age (roughly between 786 and 1258) spanned the period of the Abbasid Caliphate (750–1258), with stable political structures and flourishing trade. Major religious and cultural works of the Islamic empire were translated into Arabic and occasionally Persian. Islamic culture inherited Greek, Indic, Assyrian and Persian influences.

Science in the medieval Islamic world - Wikipedia