# Signs Of Doomsday Day!!!



## bsfmtl123 (May 24, 2011)

Two Religious views depicting the signs before Doomsday!


ACCORDING TO ISLAM:







The signs of the Day of Judgment are of two kinds: 1 – The lesser signs. 2 – The greater signs.
The first one began from the period of the Prophet Muhammad (Blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). The latter would appear close to the Day of Judgment.
Here are some of the lesser signs of the Day of Judgment.
1 – Muslims will defeat the Byzantines, conquer the Constantinople and capture Rome.
2 – Very high buildings will be built.
3 –Islamic knowledge will disappear and the ignorance will appear.
4 – Killing, adultery will become wide spread.
5 – The number of men will decrease and the number of women will increase until there will be 50 women to be looked after by one man.
6 – Islam will become strange as it was in its early stages.
7– The retreating of Euphrates will uncover a mountain of gold, for which people will fight.
8 –Two large groups of people will fight one another.
9 – 30 Dajjals (Antichrists) will appear, each one will claim to be the messenger of Allah.
10 – Earthquakes will increase, affliction will appear, and time will pass quickly.
11 – Wealth will increase.
12– Women will be wearing clothes, but they appear to be naked.
13 – A maidservant will give birth to her master/mistress.
14 – The Hadith that Prophet (Blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If my Ummah bear 15 traits…… this Hadith is not correct.
15 – Voices will be raised in mosques.
16 – Women singers and musical instruments will increase.

Here are some of the greater signs:
1 –The Mahdi(lit;the guided one) the Dajjal (Antichrist), the Ya’juj and Ma’juj (Gog and Mogog) will appear.
2 –Eesa (Jesus) will descend during the time of Dajjal.
3 – A smoke which will spread over the whole earth.
4 –Ka’bah will be destroyed and its treasure will be taken over. 5 – The Holy Qur’an will be uplifted and no Ayah will be left on earth.
6 – The sun will rise from the West. Other than these signs which are mentioned in the question are not correct. But there are other greater signs that are not mentioned here.
Allah knows best.

ACCORDING TO BIBLE:






The Bible tells of many events that will occur before the Second Coming and which will be signs that the end is near. There will be wars, famines, earthquakes, false prophets, persecutions, and an increase in wickedness. The Gospel must first be preached to all nations. The temple at Jerusalem would be destroyed. (The temple was in fact destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D.)

Many of Jesus' followers expected Him to return within their lifetimes, and that expectation was supported by several passages such as:

"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away." (NAS, Luke 21:32-33)

On the other hand, passages such as this one place the Second Coming much farther in the future:

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a witness to all the nations, and then the end shall come." (NAS, Matthew 24:14)

No completely satisfactory resolution of these differences in the Bible has ever been found, and the timing of the Second Coming has been a subject of hot debate within Christianity from the beginning. Jesus, Himself, said no one would be able to predict exactly when He would return:

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come." (NIV, Mark 13:32-33)

The event, when it happens, will be swift and unexpected:

So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him. (NIV, Matthew 24:43-44)

Over the past 2000 years there have been countless attempts to interpret current events according to the signs in the Bible. There have been innumerable predictions that the Second Coming was imminent. All have been wrong.

Which seems more appealing and true.
Accorging to Islam no one can predict when the Doomsday will come or the return of Jesus[Hazrat Isa(P.B.U.H)]
and according to Bible it is also unknown.


----------



## Necron (May 24, 2011)

You wrote this because of that guy who predicted the end of the world? I also don't belive him.


----------



## Selim873 (May 24, 2011)

Here's my theory:  See you all on December 22, 2012!


----------



## BlueStar (May 24, 2011)

I've seen Christian experts being invited as guests on news channels explaining how Camping is wrong. I find it pretty strange so many people think he's a nutball when believing the Rapture is coming next Saturday isn't even twice as crazy as thinking its coming soon (or ever) and about 40% of Americans believe Jesus is definitely or probably returning before 2050. So having some Christian representative laughing at this guy and saying he can't possibly be right because of X, Y and Z is, to me at least, a bit like someone saying "Of course this isn't a picture of the Loch Ness Monster. Everyone knows the Loch Ness Monster is invisible. And he lives on the moon anyway."
People have been sure everything is pointing to it being the end times for hundreds of years, and God still hasn't committed his glorious and divine massacre of most of the planet in a rightous holocaust.


----------



## SamAsh07 (May 24, 2011)

I'm a Muslim too, and I actually believe in all this. And to you non-believers out there, let me elaborate for you all.

1 – Muslims will defeat the Byzantines, conquer the Constantinople and capture Rome. *Not yet*
2 – Very high buildings will be built. *Look at Dubai, US, UK, massive Sky Scrapers are being built and some already exist *
3 –Islamic knowledge will disappear and the ignorance will appear. *Yep, example you all*
4 – Killing, adultery will become wide spread. *Osama dead, terrorist bombings, killings in Pakistan and now even in West have started*
5 – The number of men will decrease and the number of women will increase until there will be 50 women to be looked after by one man. *Slowly getting there*
6 – Islam will become strange as it was in its early stages. *Proof is the People in West and Muslims themselves*
7– The retreating of Euphrates will uncover a mountain of gold, for which people will fight. *Will happen someday*
8 –Two large groups of people will fight one another. *Stating a War between 2 countries*
9 – 30 Dajjals (Antichrists) will appear, each one will claim to be the messenger of Allah.*Not yet*
10 – Earthquakes will increase, affliction will appear, and time will pass quickly. *Time flies now, Earthquakes HAVE increased SIGNIFICANTLY*
11 – Wealth will increase. *True*
12– Women will be wearing clothes, but they appear to be naked.*Pointing at women wearing short mini-skirts and bikinis, Xtreme bikinis for example*
13 – A maidservant will give birth to her master/mistress. *Not aware of this yet*
14 – The Hadith that Prophet (Blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If my Ummah bear 15 traits…… this Hadith is not correct. *Not yet*
15 – Voices will be raised in mosques. *Well they've been louder than before*
16 – Women singers and musical instruments will increase. *So true, women singers have increased alot lately*


----------



## syko5150 (May 24, 2011)

SamAsh07 said:
			
		

> I'm a Muslim too, and I actually believe in all this. And to you non-believers out there, let me elaborate for you all.
> 
> 1 – Muslims will defeat the Byzantines, conquer the Constantinople and capture Rome. *Not yet*
> 2 – Very high buildings will be built. *Look at Dubai, US, UK, massive Sky Scrapers are being built and some already exist *
> ...


didn't #13 happen with Arnold Schwarzenegger having a child with his maid? lol


----------



## BlueStar (May 24, 2011)

Killing and conflicts will become widespread? Compared to what? The people dying in wars now is tiny compared to world war one and two. Women outnumbering men? Do you have a cite for this? In the most populous countries, India and China, the overwhelming desire for male children means women are becoming more and more scarce and men are having great difficulty finding themselves brides.

Isn't there also a belief in Islam that humans started off huge and got smaller and smaller over time, something contradicted by the fact we're all like a foot taller than 200 years ago?


----------



## ShinyJellicent12 (May 24, 2011)

I hate these rumors.
LET US LIVE IN PEACE INSTEAD OF FEAR FROM THE WORLD ENDING!!!


----------



## SamAsh07 (May 24, 2011)

Lol I'm not aware of any Arnold news.


----------



## Deleted member 473940 (May 24, 2011)

We will see what happens 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




.
NO ONE can predict the future.


----------



## SamAsh07 (May 24, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> Killing and conflicts will become widespread? Compared to what? The people dying in wars now is tiny compared to world war one and two. Women outnumbering men? Do you have a cite for this? In the most populous countries, India and China, the overwhelming desire for male children means women are becoming more and more scarce and men are having great difficulty finding themselves brides.
> 
> Isn't there also a belief in Islam that humans started off huge and got smaller and smaller over time, something contradicted by the fact we're all like a foot taller than 200 years ago?


What you explain about women dressed but look naked? Xtreme Bikinis is your answer and that latest tech of Water dissolving Bikini, World War 1 and 2. Of course they were there, but the 3rd will be massive when it comes, that could very well end everything. Yes people were huge before, but kept getting shorter until hitting a stop and now we have these average heights.



*@helloworld12321* - Only sinners fear for the End.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (May 24, 2011)

Selim873 said:
			
		

> Here's my theory:  See you all on December 22, 2012!



That's the Mayan thing. The world ending on that day because of their calendar was already proven false.


----------



## Ethevion (May 24, 2011)

I think I'll continue to work and game rather than listen to people who try to predict the future.


----------



## ShinyJellicent12 (May 24, 2011)

I know, but can't we live in peace?
I'm sorry, but I don't know much about the bible and Christianity
I'm Hindu and Punjabi
--
If you believe that only sinners fear the end, then so be it.
I'm not a racist


----------



## BlueStar (May 24, 2011)

It's hardly an amazing prophecy, is it? I could say the opposite, that women will be covered from head to toe and point to an increase in burka wearing as proof its coming true (here, full covering is more popular among young Muslim women than their parents generation)

Tall buildings? Again, compared to what? You can point at a structure that's the tallest building in the world, but you could do that 50 or 100 years ago. If people want to see end time signs, they'll see them, and they'll put much more stock in the vague predictions that seem to be happening than the ones that aren't. And especially the ones which are the opposite of reality, like women outnumbering men, or claims we were getting smaller when we've been constantly growing for hundreds of years.


----------



## SamAsh07 (May 24, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> It's hardly an amazing prophecy, is it? I could say the opposite, that women will be covered from head to toe and point to an increase in burka wearing as proof its coming true (here, full covering is more popular among young Muslim women than their parents generation)
> 
> Tall buildings? Again, compared to what? You can point at a structure that's the tallest building in the world, but you could do that 50 or 100 years ago. If people want to see end time signs, they'll see them, and they'll put much more stock in the vague predictions that seem to be happening than the ones that aren't. And especially the ones which are the opposite of reality, like women outnumbering men, or claims we were getting smaller when we've been constantly growing for hundreds of years.


I usually don't enjoy typing monstrous posts, so...

3 –Islamic knowledge will disappear and *the ignorance will appear.*


----------



## BlueStar (May 24, 2011)

I'd say in the past 10 years people worldwide know far more about Islam than at any point in history. It's the fastest growing religion and, off the top of my head (I'm on my phone so might be wrong) its got more followers than ever. How does that tie into 3?


----------



## SamAsh07 (May 24, 2011)

Atleast the Ignorance has started lol, by the way, I'm actually amazed at the number of "Urdu" or "Punjabi" people on this site. Makes me feel at home.


----------



## Cyan (May 24, 2011)

SamAsh07 said:
			
		

> Lol I'm not aware of any xxxx.


I think it cover all the predictions.

The prediction didn't happened yet, because not everything in the list is done yet either. but that's only if you don't know every events.
maybe other peoples know facts about predictions that you don't, and they don't about things you know, thus both of you state "The list is not complete yet, so it didn't happen yet".

maybe the full list happened many time over the years, all depend on what it's based (earth, country, region, town, every person's point of view deciding that one prediction is accomplished according to her own judgment, etc.)

I think all is a point of view, I can create "facts" 


13 – A maidservant will give birth to her master/mistress.


----------



## CarbonX13 (May 24, 2011)

1) The Roman Empire is already gone, technically speaking, so...
2) Look at Dubai, New York, etc. Done.
3) Ignorance has started for sure. Islamic knowledge? Maybe...
4) Definitely.
5) Percentage of women has increased significantly, but not to the point of a 50:1 ratio.
6) How 'strange'?
7) Definitely hasn't happened yet...
8) Could mean anything. Cold War could've been it even if there was no actual war.
9) Not yet?
10) Earthquakes, most definitely.
11) People are richer than ever before.
12) No comment. If they mean skimpy clothing, more than ever for sure.
13) I have no idea if this would be listed in recorded history.
14) No idea what this means.
15) I wouldn't know.
16) More women singers than ever, and more musical instruments than ever. True.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (May 24, 2011)

SamAsh07 said:
			
		

> BlueStar said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That really makes it sound as if anything but the Islamic knowledge is just pure ignorance. So if it is, then Ignorance has been around since Islamic religion began.


----------



## Slyakin (May 24, 2011)

ShadowSoldier said:
			
		

> That really makes it sound as if anything but the Islamic knowledge is just pure ignorance. So if it is, then Ignorance has been around since Islamic religion began.


...Wow. The way you worded your post looks like you just dissed an entire religion.

I think it meant that people would ignore religion and good deeds in general.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (May 25, 2011)

Slyakin said:
			
		

> ShadowSoldier said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not meant to sound like that all. I'm fine with religion. I accept the fact that people believe in something in religion. I personally don't believe in any religion at all. But if that islamic thing says Islamic knowledge will be forgotten and the ignorance will appear, then I don't think that religion is teaching very good things. 

Then again, maybe that's just my opinion getting mixed up with my belief that all religions is wrong considering they all state there is one and all other religions are wrong.. iono. Not meaning to offend though.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

SamAsh07 said:
			
		

> BlueStar said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Compared to our very conservative and christian past, women are definitely less clothed than before. Bikinis did not exist a 100 years ago. What the fuck, "compared to what"? Our skyscrapers are an achievement that was not achievable two hundred years ago. Christ, your arguments are bad. And I'm not even Muslim!


----------



## Gullwing (May 25, 2011)

Doomsday... Hmm.... Fringe anyone ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr3Wcx2wR7s...be_gdata_player


----------



## Alanturing (May 25, 2011)

you made one big flaw

these 'prophetesses' are too vague 

whats more you've fallen into the biggest trap of interpreting event from you own view point
your interpreting it to fit those statements  

our brains make pattern naturally of the world around us like how our an-sisters were able to see the movement of animals and thus hunt them but also to recognise patterns of danger too 
this is mere left overs of evolution

this study on pidgins will explain  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbhpdez4u_Q


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

Alanturing said:
			
		

> you made one big flaw
> 
> these 'prophetesses' are too vague
> 
> ...


Who are you responding to?


----------



## CarbonX13 (May 25, 2011)

Alanturing said:
			
		

> you made one big flaw
> 
> these 'prophetesses' are too vague
> 
> ...


What point are you trying to make?


----------



## Alanturing (May 25, 2011)

i am saying let's use reason based evidence 

my point is its no accident that religion/superstitious is just a left over of evolution 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWjGwBpLZdY


----------



## ars25 (May 25, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> 8 –Two large groups of people will fight one another. *the world wars were one of this*


----------



## Jakob95 (May 25, 2011)

All of this is fake.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

Is it just me or is this the most sexist doomsday prophecy evah? Basically half of these are saying that when women dominate or are equal to men, the world is ending. That really quite annoys me.

And yes, the ignorance thing makes it seems like Islam disses all other religious beliefs as "ignorance".

Also, it should be "Doomsday" instead of "Doomsday Day". The extra "day" is redundant.



			
				Jakob95 said:
			
		

> All of this is fake.


It IS a religious view. It's not really like the Mayan hokey pokey belief, or the Rapture shit. This was stuff actually derived from their belief systems. So technically, you're saying that both Islam and Christianity are fake........  I guess.


----------



## TheDestroyer (May 25, 2011)

NO ONE can predict when and how the world will end. 'nough said.

EDIT: Except Chuck Norris. duh!


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

1. A time appears on your hand and starts to count down.  You have to complete the given task and stop the timer.  This goes on for 7 days.


----------



## Linkiboy (May 25, 2011)

I'll believe in the end of the world when it happens.


----------



## junkerde (May 25, 2011)

troll


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

junkerde said:
			
		

> troll


Don't just come out and say you're a troll, at least pretend to make a post.

For instance, I believe the end of the world will be when the world ends and exactly that, I don't believe that one should try to predict it.


----------



## Raika (May 25, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> 1. A time appears on your hand and starts to count down.  You have to complete the given task and stop the timer.  This goes on for 7 days.


I c wut u did thar.

But it would be pretty cool if that actually happened. Fight for survival, or get erased. Whoop.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

TheDestroyer said:
			
		

> NO ONE can predict when and how the world will end. 'nough said.


In 7.6 billion years, the sun's atmosphere will be powerful enough to drag us along until the world collides into the surface and burns. Life on earth will probably have ended long before that. Then again, technically, the world (I assume you're referring to it's use as a physical world, rather than it's use as a human world) is still there, even if we're not, so that's when the entire world will *actually* end. We didn't exist for 3 billion years of the Earth's life span.

However, if we go to the human side, there are plenty of predictions as to when humans will end from scientists. Like a nuclear war, a biological disaster, a meteor.


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> TheDestroyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well that's 7.6 billion years.  We may develop something by then that protects the Earth or even our entire solar system from cosmic disaster via a supernova and we even develop a way to live without the sun, such as an artificial sun.  I mean, it's 7.6 billion years, you never know.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> Is it just me or is this the most sexist doomsday prophecy evah? Basically half of these are saying that when women dominate or are equal to men, the world is ending. That really quite annoys me.
> 
> And yes, the ignorance thing makes it seems like Islam disses all other religious beliefs as "ignorance".
> 
> ...


I fail to see how that is sexist. The whole women thing is just a sign, not a cause of doomsday or something.
That's how the OP worded it. Ignorance here is more general, meaning lack of knowledge(science) and stuff.


----------



## Zetta_x (May 25, 2011)

I don't get it, are the signs supposed to have no correlation with the end of the world or is it that when all of these signs happen then it should be the end of the world.


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

Zetta_x said:
			
		

> I don't get it, are the signs supposed to have no correlation with the end of the world or is it that when all of these signs happen then it should be the end of the world.


Not all of them, these are just signs that indicate doomsday.


----------



## Zetta_x (May 25, 2011)

I sort of understand, this is making a lot of assumptions. Thanks


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I somewhat get a lot of that from this.
The number of men will decrease and the number of women will increase until there will be *50 women to be looked after by one man.*

Then I remembered, OWAITITSISLAMMYBAD.


----------



## TheDestroyer (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> TheDestroyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The first one is possibly a theory and it will remain a theory unless proven. I don't think some might live that long so, no one really knows if that's true or not. Science can be wrong sometimes and it is not always certain especially when we are talking about the things outside this world like the outer space.

Second one, that is what I presume human race will end. The human race might end before the world itself. So.... play more, life is short.


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

TheDestroyer said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


"We were born with a chaotic world, we lived mutually with it, and in the end there will be only us, both to be extinguished together"

How was that for the space theory?


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

Zetta_x said:
			
		

> I don't get it, are the signs supposed to have no correlation with the end of the world or is it that when all of these signs happen then it should be the end of the world.


From the Islamic point of view, these signs are independent from doomsday(or Judgment Day) and are simply there to give us a vague indication as to when Judgment Day is. When all of these signs have happened(including the major ones like the second coming of Jesus), it will mean Judgment Day is imminent.

Also, there's a distinction between Doomsday(the end of the world) and Judgment Day. Judgment day is when all the good people go to Paradise(or some kind of reshaped, Utopia-styled Earth) and all the bad people go to Hell, for varying amounts of time(depending on the case). Doomsday would be the extinction of the human race. Little distinction here. In Islam(and I am leaded to believe Christianity) there are no Doomsday.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

TheDestroyer said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The sun is constantly expanding into a red giant. I'm fairly certain that it's a fact and NOT a theory. Suffice to say, since we're close to the sun, it's fairly certain to assume that we will either dragged into it's atmosphere when it's radius increases or we will freeze to death when it turns into a white dwarf (which probably won't even happen).


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> TheDestroyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So you don't think there will be a supernova and galactic rebirth?


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sun isn't big enough to have a supernova.


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wow, I didn't know that.  I have to rethink things, now...

Well of the two outcomes you said, which do you expect to happen?


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are you meaning, perhaps, that it's sexist because every man will be married to 50 women? Because that's not how it was to be taken. It simply means there will be a 50:1 ratio of women over man. And why the hell do you have to assume polygamy=Islam? Because it permits 4 *consenting* women to marry a guy? And, again, PERMITS. As in, "do it if you want, I don't care either way".


----------



## Deleted_171835 (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> TheDestroyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


By the time that occurs, we would have advanced space travel and would be residing on the many different planets in our universe. Hopefully.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not that. I mean the phrase "looked after". Obvious male dominance, which IIRC is very prominent in Islamic beliefs. Not really sexist, just a very strange code of law.

Actually, male dominance in any religion annoys me.


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I concur.


----------



## TheDestroyer (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



To be honest, I have no idea of what you guys just said. lol I must be sleeping on science class that much. But anyway, I don't want the world to end just yet. I'm still young. lolz


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

TheDestroyer said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Your 20. You should know about this shit... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





World isn't ending yet... unless some freak thing occurs and the world collides with a meteor or something.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The "looked after" here is a figure of speech. And what exactly do you mean by male dominance? Sorry but my francophone ass is having a bit of a pain here.


----------



## TheDestroyer (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> TheDestroyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



lol stalker. Well I only cared about the things that is important in life such as money and getting laid and I haven't yet. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 so no.. world can't end yet during my lifetime. I consider 20 young lolz 30 is old XDD


----------



## ShadowSoldier (May 25, 2011)

SoulSnatcher said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well they say that Mars is possibly livable. Considering they found.... water was it? I know they found something there. I can't remember if it was water or a bacteria thing or whatever.


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

TheDestroyer said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In layman's terms, a supernova is when the Sun blows up and galactic rebirth is a term I made up (I meant to say solar rebirth) to mean when the solar system reforms.  Of course, that's a VERY basic explanation.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I mean that a large portion of religions tend to view women as inferior to men. There are no female priests, popes, rabbis, prophets, and such... in Islam Polygamy is allowed but Polyandry is banned.

Assigning gender specific roles in religion is extremely common. (and by very definition, sexist)


----------



## machomuu (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Unfortunately enough.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> I mean that a large portion of religions tend to view women as inferior to men. There are no female priests, popes, rabbis, prophets, and such... in Islam Polygamy is allowed but Polyandry is banned.
> 
> Assigning gender specific roles in religion is extremely common. (and by very definition, sexist)


There's acertain logic as to why Polygamy is allowed and polyandry is banned. Men can have several sexual partners(sexual as in reproduction) while women can only have one. And The Qur'an is pretty clear about Women and Men being equal in rights and responsibility, albeit the responsibilities are slightly different(depending on natural distinction of the two sexes). Women prophet wouldn't really make sense. Who would accept being lead and taught by a female(in those archaic times of course)?


----------



## MADKATZ99 (May 25, 2011)

Didn't Muhammad predict the day of doom would occur in 1110AD?


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

MADKATZ99 said:
			
		

> Didn't Muhammad predict the day of doom would occur in 1110AD?


No. Where'd you hear that?


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's the problem. Gender specification. I can see why Polyandry could be illogical but why does the woman HAVE to be the one to "take care of the baby at home" and stuff? That's sexist right there. If I am correct, there have been a lot of limitations placed on women concerning social interaction.

It is sexist. Whether it's negative or positive is up to the observer.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, you NEED your mother when you are a month old, don't you? The mother, biologically is the one who must take care of a child in it's early life. A male cannot breastfeed. Because Women have such a responsibility over the children, they also get to be the boss of the household. Boss, not slave. And there are no social limitations, in theory. Whether the Arabs oblige to that is another matter. Sure, there are gender roles, but I would hardly call that sexist, seeing as those gender roles are based more on biology than religious law.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You don't need your mother, as not everybody is breast fed as a child.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sure, in terms of their belief system they are equal. But I feel that by modern terms, they aren't.

I'm getting kinda tired of this... *yawn*


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

ShadowSoldier said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not today, but go back a few hundred years and pretty much everyone was breastfed, right? That's what I mean by biological gender role.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> Point taken, but here's something I found.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Going back to what I said, women and men are completely equal in theory, but in practice, not everyone respects that. That's not the problem of the faith, but a problem with the believers.
Getting tired as well, but I haven't had such a good debate in a while...


----------



## ShadowSoldier (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I wouldn't even say that's a religion thing or anything any more. There's lots of people who don't believe in a religion, or some who believe in different ones and women still get treated less than equal. It's not a problem with the faith, or believers, but just people in general.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

ShadowSoldier said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I know that, but this is a question of whether or not Islam as a religion is saying women are inferior. Can we now agree now that Islam isn't sexist towards women?


----------



## Jakob95 (May 25, 2011)

In Judaism it doesn't say anything about the end of the world.  Although it does say that when the Messiah is going to come, the world will be destroyed but Israel will rise up and the Jews will live in peace.  Something like that, well that is what I heard don't take my word.

EDIT:  Oops was wrong about that on the top.  It was actually that when the Messiah will come, Israel will be the central government to all the people in the world and everyone will live in peace, something like how before Adam ate his apple.  The temple of Jerusalem  will be rebuilt.


----------



## MADKATZ99 (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> MADKATZ99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well the big Mo was always saying how he was the last messenger and the 'day of doom' was soon. It's in the Hadith, Tabari 1:182, Muhammad says the end of the world would happen 500 years after his prophet calling. 

Tabari I:181 “The Prophet said, ‘I was sent immediately before the coming of the Day of Doom. I preceded it like this one preceding that one’—referring to his index and middle finger.”
Tabari I:182 “He said: ‘Allah will not make this nation [of Islam] incapable of lasting half a day—a day being a thousand years.’

Of course, Muslims always dismiss it and say that Tabari is not a well-trusted source unlike Bukhari.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

MADKATZ99 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well I dismiss it by saying that it is an Hadith and thus not part of the Islamic faith.


----------



## Magmorph (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> I know that, but this is a question of whether or not Islam as a religion is saying women are inferior. Can we now agree now that Islam isn't sexist towards women?


That depends on what you mean by a religion. Islamic theocracies are very sexist towards women.

The worst part about religions is that almost every passage apparently has hundreds of interpretations. Obviously some people interpret the Qur'an as a sexist book.


----------



## MADKATZ99 (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Can we now agree now that Islam isn't sexist towards women?


Hahaha are you serious??

*Qur'an 4:43 * "Believers, approach not prayers with a mind befogged or intoxicated until you understand what you utter. Nor when you are polluted, until after you have bathed. If you are ill, or on a journey, or come from answering the call of nature, or you have touched a woman, and you find no water, then take for yourselves clean dirt, and rub your faces and hands. Lo! Allah is Benign, Forgiving."

In islam, dirt is cleaner than a woman! LOL

*Bukhari:V3B48N826* "The Prophet said, 'Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?' The women said, 'Yes.' He said, 'This is because of the deficiency of a woman's mind.'"

I really didn't think there was anything to debate there.


----------



## dgwillia (May 25, 2011)

There have been signs of the end of the world for like....the past 200ish years, if not longer


----------



## MADKATZ99 (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Well I dismiss it by saying that it is an Hadith and thus not part of the Islamic faith.


There are indeed muslims who do not follow the Hadith, however I believe most do. Most muslims' goal is to emulate Muhammad, and you can't do that without reading about his actions and sayings, which IS the hadith. 

The qur'an will always have the most authenticty and authority, however the Hadith is still relied upon to give the qur'an much needed context.


----------



## omgpwn666 (May 25, 2011)

I believe in god, but don't believe anyone will ever predict the end.


----------



## BlueStar (May 25, 2011)

Didn't have time to do this last night, but let's go through them one by one.



			
				SamAsh07 said:
			
		

> 1 – Muslims will defeat the Byzantines, conquer the Constantinople and capture Rome. *No*
> 2 – Very high buildings will be built. *Today's building are high compared to those 100 years ago, they'll probably be small compared to those built 100 years from now. But yes there are 'high buildings'*
> 3 –Islamic knowledge will disappear and the ignorance will appear. *During the Islamic Golden Age, Islamic Scholars were absolutely trailblazing the way with important discoveries, while the west was lingering in the dark ages.  After the Mongol invasion, this knowledge was very quickly stifled.  Now, it's starting to recover.  So no, the biggest disappearing of Islamic knowledge already happened and it didn't lead to the End Times.  Unless you mean people being ignorant about Islam - which people are, but not to the extent they were during, say, the crusades. *
> 4 – Killing, adultery will become wide spread. *Very little killing compared to almost all periods of conflict. 37 million died in just 4 years during WWI alone.  In the 8 years since the invasion of Iraq, 0.3% of that number have died in that conflict*
> ...



So on that basis I give today an Islamic End Time Score of 3/16.  Or 0.5 out of 10.  I think it probably hit far, far higher than that during many periods of history.  People always think they're living in the end times.  Many of our great, great, grandfathers thought it and I'm sure some of our great, great grandchildren will think it too.  It seems to be an innate human trait.

The Rapture Ready Forums are always good for a laugh
http://www.rr-bb.com/


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 25, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> All of this is fake.
> 
> No can know if it is fake or not but the point which seems most logical is that all of this has been written for more than 1400 years ago and look now all this can be seen becoming reality.
> 
> ...



Every Muslim follows the Hadith of the Prophet(S.A.W).Instructions for the method of prayer are in Hadith and the instructions for giving Zakat(giving money to poor people) are in Hadith and many more......
Qur'an is the first source of Islamic Law and Hadith is the second.

The Qur'an says,
"Nor does he say anything of his own desire.It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him."
The words of Muhammad(S.A.W) are indirectly from Allah Himself.

Allah Knows BEST!


----------



## chris888222 (May 25, 2011)

I had enough of this end of the world crap.

Only god can and will decide when the world shall end...

HAPPY YET OLD MAN?!?!?


----------



## Evo.lve (May 25, 2011)

SamAsh07 said:
			
		

> I'm a Muslim too, and I actually believe in all this. And to you non-believers out there, let me elaborate for you all.
> 
> 1 – Muslims will defeat the Byzantines, conquer the Constantinople and capture Rome. *Not yet*_The Byzantine empire fell, Constantinople fell, Rome fell (probably not Muslims doing it though)_
> 2 – Very high buildings will be built. *Look at Dubai, US, UK, massive Sky Scrapers are being built and some already exist *_true_
> ...



My $.02


----------



## Shockwind (May 25, 2011)

chris888222 said:
			
		

> I had enough of this end of the world crap.
> 
> *Only god can and will decide when the world shall end...*
> 
> HAPPY YET OLD MAN?!?!?


I agree with you. I don't believe in this whole 'End Of The World' thingys, since God only knows when the world will end.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

MADKATZ99 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree but. I don't think any Islamic law should be based on an Hadith. If God didn't mention it in the Qur'an, which, according to their belief, is the word of God and gives all the rules that have to be followed in order to be a Muslim and that it touches every sphere of life, then anything else in the Hadith are not necessary. That's why I think Muslims should wear gold and silk and play music if that's what they want.


----------



## spotanjo3 (May 25, 2011)

helloworld12321 said:
			
		

> I hate these rumors.
> LET US LIVE IN PEACE INSTEAD OF FEAR FROM THE WORLD ENDING!!!



Really ? Where is peace ? You should fear from the world ending because the bible warn us about it. look at Noah warned those people like you who wanted to live in peace and see whats happening ? They lost their lives in flood and noah's family survived in the ARK. You gotta to think. Your quote came from the Satan the Devil wanting you in peace until its too late. YOU GOTTA THINK! Wake up and smell the bible. Look at this WORLD.. ALL SIGNS are there and this time it is increase and getting worse.

@chris888222,

No, God will not decide when its ending.. Please stop false about this. Jesus said the world will end which mean Earth itself will not explode or destroy but removed wick system (who? Those people who knows about God but dont bother to pray and serve in the name of God -- Jehovah.. God will bring an armageddon to removed people who is independence from God or they thought they loved God but thats it without doing nothing to serve God include government kingdom will be removed. Government Kingdom is very WICK and full of CORRUPTION!! Hear about 144,000 people go to heaven ? Yes, until 144,000 are finished then you will see.. According to the bible about 144,000. Look it in the google.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 25, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> MADKATZ99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You have answered the first one very well but the answer to the second one is incorrect Islamic Law is not complete without Hadith,
The Qur'an says,
"Nor does he say anything of his own desire.It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him."
Everything which the Prophet(S.A.W) used to say was direct instructions from Allah so indirectly all his sayings were from Him.

Islam is based on five Pillars:Tauheed,Salat,Fasting,Zakat and Pilgrimage(Hajj)
Quran only tells Muslims to fulfill these five duties but the method of performing these Pillars is found in Hadith
Islamic Law is based upon four things QURAN,SUNNAH(AS WELL AS HADITH),IJMA AND QIYAS.

So Islamic Law is based upon Hadith as well.


----------



## Vigilante (May 25, 2011)

If you want doomsday kill your self and thats doomsday(for you).
Don't get us involved.

You know in the Mayan calendar,you will never see December 21,2012 as doomsday(atleast thats what I have heard in a TV show) nor in bible or anything.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 25, 2011)

Vigilante said:
			
		

> If you want doomsday kill your self and thats doomsday(for you).
> Don't get us involved.
> 
> You know in the Mayan calendar,you will never see December 21,2012 as doomsday(atleast thats what I have heard in a TV show) nor in bible or anything.



No one wants the Doomsday 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



Please bother reading the core of the topic, it's to eliminate all the rumors claiming the Doomsday(or Judgement Day) according
to a religious prospect and what the Bible or Quran has to say about it.


----------



## wasim (May 25, 2011)

I am a muslim too and i do beleive in this 


			
				QUOTE said:
			
		

> 1 – Muslims will defeat the Byzantines, conquer the Constantinople and capture Rome.
> 2 – Very high buildings will be built.
> 3 –Islamic knowledge will disappear and the ignorance will appear.
> 4 – Killing, adultery will become wide spread.
> ...



But we can't really tell when the world will end !


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 25, 2011)

wasim said:
			
		

> I am a muslim too and i do beleive in this
> 
> 
> 
> ...



YES!


----------



## Hop2089 (May 25, 2011)

There will be no signs of doomsday because it will happen faster and unexpectedly than people can plan for much less imagine.

The world will most likely end by human hands most likely by war, not God, nor aliens or anything else.


----------



## SamAsh07 (May 25, 2011)

War is right, but the battles will be so fierce that god will send upon his wrath with Natural Disasters to clear off the impurity.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 25, 2011)

SamAsh07 said:
			
		

> War is right, but the battles will be so fierce that god will send upon his wrath with Natural Disasters to clear off the impurity.



Which battles and is this from the Qur'an.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 25, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> You have answered the first one very well but the answer to the second one is incorrect Islamic Law is not complete without Hadith,
> The Qur'an says,
> "Nor does he say anything of his own desire.It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him."
> Everything which the Prophet(S.A.W) used to say was direct instructions from Allah so indirectly all his sayings were from Him.
> ...


Read this and this. There are clearly Muslims who do not follow the Hadiths and don't use it in Shariah. The Qur'an does give some indications of how to accomplish the duties of a Muslim. I believe these Muslims follow the purest form of Islam. 

Also, the Hadith were written some 200 years after the Prophet's death and are word of Man, not word of God and are, thus, not under the divine of protection of Allah. It is the very reasons why Muslims consider the Bible as word of Man ratter than word of God. Because it could very well have been tampered with and they aren't protected of human error.


----------



## SamAsh07 (May 25, 2011)

No not from the Qur'an, this was based from my own speculations 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Of course something similar to this might happen.


----------



## Dangy (May 26, 2011)

I personally believe in the Three Days of Darkness. The Three Days have been announced by many mystics, viz., Bl. Anna-Maria Taigi, Padre Pio, Elizabeth Canori-Mora, Rosa-Colomba Asdente, Palma d'Oria, in Italy; Father Nectou, in Belgium; St. Hildegard, in Germany; Pere Lamy, Marie Baourdi, Marie Martel, Marie-Julie Jahenny, in France. (This list is not exhaustive; many more mystics have announced the Three Days.)

Here are the proximate signs in their probable order of occurrence. This, to be sure, is only my own opinion, and I may be wrong for I am no prophet myself; but, after studying a large number of prophecies, this order appears to me to be the most likely:


Flouting of church laws, irreverence and immodesty in church, fall in attendance at church.
    Lack of charity towards others, heartlessness, indifference, divisions, contentions, godlessness, pride in human knowledge.
    Breakdown of family life: immorality, adultery, perversion of youth via the media (e.g. homosexuals giving lectures in schools), immodest fashions (e.g. mini-skirts, bikinis, see-throughs), people concerned only with eating, drinking, dancing and other pleasures.
    Civil commotions, contempt for authority, downfall of governments, *confusion in high places*, *corruption*, coups d'etat, civil war, *revolution*. (The first four proximate signs have already come to pass, at least partly; for we are yet to see civil war and revolution in the West. But the sequence of events is not strictly chronological; there is room for some overlapping. Thus, the 5th proximate sign seems to have begun also.)
    Floods and droughts, crop failures, unusual weather, tornadoes, earthquakes, tidal waves, famines, epidemics, *unknown diseases* (e.g. new strains of viruses).

*The Warning* will take place between the proximate and the immediate signs. It will be a supernatural occurrence. During the Warning, everyone will be made aware of his/her own sinfulness, and many will wish to die, but the Warning itself will be completely harmless. The Warning must be viewed as the last act of mercy from God, a final appeal to mankind to do penance before the three days of darkness and the destruction of three-quarters of the human race. At a time when the murder of unborn babies and the sin of Sodom and Lesbos have become respectable and sometimes legal, we should not wonder why God is going to punish mankind.

By that time, war and revolution will have already caused a high deathtoll, and _Communism will be victorious_, but all this will be as nothing compared with the deathtoll caused by the Three Days.


----------



## BlueStar (May 26, 2011)

Any God who'd massacre his own people based on things like homosexuals giving lectures in schools is a wicked and evil deity.


----------



## machomuu (May 26, 2011)

SamAsh07 said:
			
		

> War is right


Well that's a moral discussion for another thread.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 26, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> Any God who'd massacre his own people based on things like homosexuals giving lectures in schools is a wicked and evil deity.
> Agreed.
> 
> 
> ...


War is by no means right. But it is necessary.


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah yeah w/e.  I don't believe that your muslim profit will come and destroy israel.  It doesn't say anywhere in the Torah that your Muslim Hazrat Isa will come and destroy Israel, so I don't believe in that garbage.  You can believe in it if you want.  But I don't believe in anything that the Qu'ran says or the bible.  I believe in what the Torah says and you believe in what the Muslim beliefs say, so either way this topic can not be debated at all with us.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 26, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Yeah yeah w/e.  I don't believe that your muslim profit will come and destroy israel.  It doesn't say anywhere in the Torah that your Muslim Hazrat Isa will come and destroy Israel, so I don't believe in that garbage.  You can believe in it if you want.  But I don't believe in anything that the Qu'ran says or the bible.  I believe in what the Torah says and you believe in what the Muslim beliefs say, so either way this topic can not be debated at all with us.


Hazrat Isa=Jesus
Also, I think the garbage part wasn't necessary.


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well to me its all garbage.  To you its treasure.  To you Judaism is garbage.  hope you understand what I mean.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 26, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not Muslim. To me, none of it is garbage. Muslims don't think Judaism is garbage, only that it's outdated.


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Also how the hell can there be 2 Messiahs one for the Jews and one for the Muslims.  Both religions can not be correct.  Its either one.  How is it outdated?  Its more modern then Islam, at least woman have freedom.


----------



## TrolleyDave (May 26, 2011)

Sorry to break this to the followers of the Abrahamic faiths but there's no such thing as the Day of Judgement/The Rapture.  There's also no way the god described in the Abrahamic faith could exist, there are also far too many contradictions in his character.  I'd love it if the existence of an almighty being was true, it would be an incredible and mind blowing thing - however the god described in the Abrahamic faiths simply cannot exist.



			
				Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Also how the hell can there be 2 Messiahs one for the Jews and one for the Muslims.  Both religions can not be correct.  Its either one.  How is it outdated?  Its more modern then Islam, at least woman have freedom.



How is Judaism more modern than Islam?  It's alot older.  Yes it's been modernised, but not it's not more modern.  Luckily for most faiths other than Islam they don't believe that their texts are the unalterable word of God so the religions can be modernised.  Islam will always be the same as it ever was because they consider it blasphemy to change, alter or modernise the texts in any way.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 26, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't understand your comment about there being two messiahs. Muslims and Christians believe Jesus(or Yeshua, or Isa, or however you want to call him) is the Jewish Messiah. That's how they think Judaism is outdated. Because Jews don't acknowledge Jesus. Women have freedom and are completely equal to men in Islam. Don't let the actions of the Arabs fool you. You can't say Judaism is more modern than Islam since Islam is much more recent than Judaism. Also, I find it amusing you call the Islamic faith garbage when your own, Judaism, shares many common traits to Islam in term of morals and commandments and religious duties. Kosher food is one example.


----------



## TrolleyDave (May 26, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> I don't understand your comment about there being two messiahs. Muslims and Christians believe Jesus(or Yeshua, or Isa, or however you want to call him) is the Jewish Messiah. That's how they think Judaism is outdated. Because Jews don't acknowledge Jesus. Women have freedom and *are completely equal to men in Islam*. Don't let the actions of the Arabs fool you. You can't say Judaism is more modern than Islam since Islam is much more recent than Judaism. Also, I find it amusing you call the Islamic faith garbage when your own, Judaism, shares many common traits to Islam in term of morals and commandments and religious duties. Kosher food is one example.



I think you need to study your religion a little better.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 26, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Again, NOT MUSLIM.
And I don't need to study Islam better. The Qur'an states clearly than man and woman are equal both to God and to the law. Hadiths state otherwise? They aren't really part of the Islamic faith. I already explained that stuff before. 
And why can't the Abrahamic God exist? I'm curious as to what makes you say that.


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

Um actually most of the ideas of Islam are stolen from Judaism.  Between how would you feel like if I said this?  Tomorrow I am going to make my new religion change up the words in the some random religion I find and create my own.  Then I will go conquer lands and force people to convert to my religion.  Fool people that god talked to me.  And what not.


----------



## TrolleyDave (May 26, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Again, NOT MUSLIM.
> And I don't need to study Islam better. The Qur'an states clearly than man and woman are equal both to God and to the law. Hadiths state otherwise? They aren't really part of the Islamic faith. I already explained that stuff before.
> And why can't the Abrahamic God exist? I'm curious as to what makes you say that.



Alright, then I change my statement to "You need to study Islam better" and apologise for my previous one.  No, the Qu'ran clearly states that women and men are not equal.  According to the Sharia one mans testimony is the equivalent to 2 womens testimony.  Then there's also the fact that a man can have 4 wives but a woman can only have one husband.  Then there's also the matter of inheritance.  And of course the fact that women have to be covered from head to toe including hair covering, but a man only has to keep a small portion of his body covered.  There is lots of gender inequality in Islam.  When it was first created it was light years ahead of it's time as far as womens rights were concerned, but as time has gone on and societies have evolved it's been left behind because it can not be modernised or changed.  And as far as the Hadiths not being part of the Islamic religion that's not entirely true.  There are sects of Islam that are Qu'ranists but most agree that to understand the Qu'ran and to have a full Islamic system you need the Sunnah, Hadiths and Tafsir.

I'm just about to go to bed but I'll answer the question about why the Abrahamic god can't exist later on.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 26, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> According to the Sharia one mans testimony is the equivalent to 2 womens testimony.
> Then there's also the fact that a man can have 4 wives but a woman can only have one husband.
> Then there's also the matter of inheritance.
> And of course the fact that women have to be covered from head to toe including hair covering, but a man only has to keep a small portion of his body covered.


Already explained number one in my previous posts on this topic.
There's a good reason for polygamy to be allowed and polyandry to be forbidden. Men can have several sexual(as in reproduction) partners and women can only have one. And if a man marries several(consenting) wives, he must be perfectly equitable between all of them. I personally don't see it as a problem.
Women get(depending on the case and relation to the deceased)half the share of a man because men have more financial responsibility. 
The Qur'an doesn't say a thing about the Hijab, let alone the Burka. Those are only in the Hadiths.

I personally think it is incoherent for Muslims to follow the Hadiths for many reasons, some of which I already explained on this topic.


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> TrolleyDave said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


AIDS. lol jk
In Judaism you can only have 1 wife unless you divorce.  Women must cover there knees as well, and and elbows, either before they marry or after.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 26, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And just what do AIDS have to do with anything?


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Having sex with different woman can lead you to get HIV if that woman has.  Greater chance of marrying someone with HIV since you marry 4 women.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 26, 2011)

Since adultery is forbidden to Muslims and your wives would probably be Muslim if you have four, the chances of HIV are very, very low.


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Since adultery is forbidden to Muslims and your wives would probably be Muslim if you have four, the chances of HIV are very, very low.


Muslims are only allowed to marry Muslims right?  In Judaism I am not sure if you are allowed to marry any other race, but if you do its very shameful to your family.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 26, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Muslims can marry Jews and Chrisians too. In Judiasm, it isn't allowed at all.


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah in Judaism its pretty disgraceful if you do.


----------



## wasim (May 26, 2011)

Honestly
i don't see the point of this discussion as the world WILL end and there is nothing we can do abt it
so why waste time talking and thinking abt it ??


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

wasim said:
			
		

> Honestly
> i don't see the point of this discussion as the world WILL end and there is nothing we can do abt it
> so why waste time talking and thinking abt it ??


The world will end when you die.  For you that is.

/endthread.


----------



## Rogue_Syst3m (May 26, 2011)

just wear your magic underwear and you'll be fine....


----------



## BlueStar (May 26, 2011)




----------



## cwstjdenobs (May 26, 2011)

Anyone know any of the non Abrahamic religions doomsday/end of the world prophecies/stories/mythologies whatever you should call them? I only know the ones that directly lead to monotheism.

EDIT:


			
				pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Muslims can marry Jews and Chrisians too.



I know 1 Muslim who is married to a Buddhist with whom he has 2 daughters. I'm guessing that's technically a bad thing?


----------



## BlueStar (May 26, 2011)

cwstjdenobs said:
			
		

> Anyone know any of the non Abrahamic religions doomsday/end of the world prophecies/stories/mythologies whatever you should call them? I only know the ones that directly lead to monotheism.



Hindus and Buddhists believe in eternal cycles of destruction and creation and don't really have an 'end of everything' story.  Maybe it comes from them not having one all powerful kick-ass guy in charge who's gonna snap and go Columbine.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 26, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Muslims are not allowed to marry idolaters unless they convert without any compulsion.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (May 26, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> Muslims are not allowed to marry idolaters unless they convert without any compulsion.



Okay you have a go at people for not interpreting the Koran the way you do, saying they have no understanding and should have more, and make out you have respect for other religions and demand respect then you say this, which shows you don't practice what you preach. Buddhists don't worship idols, it's basically an atheist faith where gods are not necessary so how can they be idolaters? If it's permissible to marry people of the book as well as other Muslims you could have just said that without letting your lack of education about other faiths and hypocrisy show. 

I'm going to be more polite and admit I'm not being polite you bigoted piece of close minded scum. You are what is wrong with the world, taking every chance to attack others while expecting special treatment for yourself.

Isn't the black rock technically an idol? An object that isn't El(well that's one of the names the God of the Abrahamic religions identifies as, among many other gods he claimed to be, head of a pantheon of older gods and father to Bael. From the pantheist faith yours and the Jews and Christians is based on) that people pray towards.

Also there's nothing scholarly in reading and analysing historically inaccurate ancient plagiarism based on historically inaccurate ancient plagiarism, as if it is 100% literal. Especially when some parts are obviously allegories. Only the study of nature and things that happen in reality, and not fairy tales constructed totally in peoples heads as way of making people go on a murderous empire building rampage(isn't imperialism bad according to you guys?), is a true learning.


----------



## TrolleyDave (May 26, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Already explained number one in my previous posts on this topic.
> 
> Your explanation is slightly weak when you take into account the sayings of Mohammed.  Plus explaining away gender inequality doesn't stop it being gender inequality.  Pseudo-scientists explained Eugenics, does that stop it being a racialist idea?
> 
> ...



Does that mean Muslims are free to marry Athiests?


----------



## Jakob95 (May 26, 2011)

I don't have to respect any other religion then my own.  Why do I have to respect your religion when you guys don't respect us.


----------



## Tanas (May 26, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

>


The thing is that he's not making Christians look stupid and gullible, they do a great job of that themselves.
The only difference between Harold Camping and these Christians who didn't believe him when he's said that the world was going to end on the may 21st, is that Harold Camping got the date wrong. The fact of the matter is, that any Christians who called Harold Camping a loon for predicting the wrong date of the rapture are just being hypocrites, because they themselves have the same stupid belief system has this lunatic does, it just that Harold Camping happened to get the date wrong, thats all


----------



## Pyrmon (May 27, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, as an evolved being capable of reason, you are entitled to respecting other people's opinions. Most people would agree on that. 
Muslims respect Judaism, they don't respect Israel because of the judeo-palestinian conflict. Respect of other religion is clearly stated in their religious scripture.


----------



## CarbonX13 (May 27, 2011)

cwstjdenobs said:
			
		

> Anyone know any of the non Abrahamic religions doomsday/end of the world prophecies/stories/mythologies whatever you should call them? I only know the ones that directly lead to monotheism.


Buddhists believe in the law of reincarnation and karma, in which all beings in the world are reborn from past lives, and may continue to be reborn in a cycle unless they attain enlightenment. Based on this, Buddhists also believe that 'all your surroundings are created from your heart/mind'. This would mean that people decide the future for themselves (through karma), and if you take that into perspective, you can say that humans are destroying the world they live in. There haven't been any specific mentions of 'end of the world' in Buddhist texts as far as I know, but there are mentions of what the time periods between the arrival of another Buddha (there are a lot of Buddhas, for those who didn't know) are like, including mentions of some disasters, or what humans/beings would appear like and what they do.


----------



## TrolleyDave (May 27, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3668367:date=May 27 2011, 01:06 AM:name=pyrmon24)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pyrmon24 @ May 27 2011, 01:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668367"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It isn't gender inequality. The second women is mostly there as backup for the first on. She only has something to do/say IF the first woman makes a mistake or doesn't know what to say. This is explained by the fact that, until very very recently, women didn't have a role AT ALL in anything that had to do with finances, even concerning themselves! Hell, until the 1960s, Canadian women couldn't buy a car without the signature of their husband. In such societies, of course a women can forget this or that about financial stuff. Now things are slightly different, but not that much. In an Islamic nation, men are expected of paying the bills. A woman shouldn't have to go to work to feed a husband who does nothing. That does not mean women are forbidden from working or taking place in financial or political matters or of making decisions as to how a family's money should be spent. Sorry for not being clearer before, but it was late.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Again, it is gender inequality.  What it's saying is that women are mentally deficient enough that there is a high chance that they won't remember all the details, will get nervous and not know what to say and that they need another woman there to "help" them.  And by omitting the same rule for men it's saying that men never suffer from this problem.  Therefore implying that men are mentally and intellectually superior to women.  There are men who would suffer exactly the same problems that women would suffer under the same circumstances, so why not the need for a backup male as well?  However you try to explain this away it will always be gender inequality as gender inequality is defined.  The whole notion of the 1 man = 2 woman witness in the Sharia is sexist and prejudicial.

And going on about the other things only distracts from the original point and in no way offers proof that women are mentally deficient to the point where they need backup to give witness.  All that does is show that as a society we were mistaken in our attitude towards women.  Luckily our societies are fluid and morphous.  Nothing is set in stone and with effort and understanding it can be changed and corrected.  However this isn't the case with an Islamic society as what's in the Qu'ran now is what was and what will always be in the Qu'ran.  The Islamic ideology and belief system is set in stone and as it's the "immutable word of God" can not be questioned, judged or corrected.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The reason is mostly biological. In Islam, marrying means, hopefully, starting a family. The very point of marriage is an union between two(or more) people that are in love to make children, ultimate fruit of that love. A woman only being able to be pregnant from on man at a time, having several husbands would be simply pointless. But a man having several wives can get a child from every one of them at the same time. But, again, marrying a second wife requires that your first wife is ok with it and means you must treat them equally, not proffering one over another. Call it inequality if you want, I think it makes sense.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

For most cultures and societies marrying means starting a family, it's not exclusive to Islam.  I totally agree that marriage is a union between two people that are in love.  However as far as I'm concerned THAT is the fruit of their love.  Having children is a bonus.  What you're basically saying is that 2 people who marry but can't conceive shouldn't actually be considered married because the whole point of being married is to have children.  The whole point of being married is to show that you love and care for the person you're marrying so much that you want to be considered a union.  Marriage stopped being a purely religious ceremony decades ago, or in most modern nations it has anyway.

I totally agree that women can only have one child at a time.  However it wouldn't stop a woman with 2 husbands having a child from each of them.  All it would mean is that the numbers wouldn't increase at a rapid rate ie.  Instead of 4 children born a year it would be 1.  So theoretically it wouldn't be pointless because each Man would still be able to have a child or children with the woman he loves.  There would still be a solid loving family unit.  And unless I'm mistaken that's the whole point of marriage.  The only reason to prefer a man with many wives over a woman with many husbands would be because the number of births would be higher.  In an already over-populated world wouldn't lower birthrates be a better thing than a rapidly increasing population?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Read above.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Again, there are plenty of women who could more than equitable between all of her husbands.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Islam teaches that men must care for women. This does not remove them of any right, only that men should be gallant towards women and be the ones to pay. In an Islamic world, men have more financial responsibility(in a marriage). Besides, the half of a man's share thing is really a bare minimum. The deceased can give how much he wants to whomever he wants, but he needs to give these minimum shares.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

At the time Mohammed wrote (or dictated if you want to get semantic) the Qu'ran that's how society was.  However as I've stated before society has moved on from these times.  Society is now at a point where women are more than capable of caring for themselves.  The whole hunter/gatherer idea of the Male is long gone in modern society.  Life in this day age is completely unrecognisable compared to life back then.  In this day and age women play an equal role with regards to supporting themselves and their families.  I should introduce you to my sister.  She looks after her two children, her terminally ill husband, helps out in the local community, helps my parents and much much more.  There is no such thing as a gender specific role with regards to the family unit any more, society has progressed.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The verses that are linked to the Hijab don't really talk about the Hijab and only a bad interpretation leads to the Hijab. I read them, they don't talk about head coverings.[/b] Unless you feel like reading those verses and deciding for yourself whether they mention the Hijab, you'll have to take my word for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've read the verses.  When it comes to religion I rarely take anyones word for anything.  I've actually read the Qu'ran several times.  I haven't had a chance to read all the Hadiths yet, but that's an awful lot of material to work through obviously.  Here is one of the verses regarding women's "modesty" and the one most commonly used to support the need for both the Hijab and the Burkha.



Spoiler



“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31)



It says that women should not display their beauty and ornaments (ornaments meaning jewellery) except what must ordinarily appear and that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to family members.  As the hair is not something that must ordinarily appear in order to carry on with day to day life then it's saying that it must be covered.  However, you don't have to take my word for it.  Feel free to have a read through the many many many things that Islamic scholars have written on the subject.  All Islamic scholars from the Sunni and Shi'ite sects agree that it means the Hijab is a necessary part of the female uniform for Islamic women.  Salafi/Wahabbi belief goes further obviously stating that the word veil does indeed refer to a face covering and therefore the Niqab (most people mistake the Niqab for the Burkha in western society) is what women should be wearing.  If you read further on in the Qu'ran it states that the Burkha is necessary for Mohammeds wives as they should be completely shielded from the eyes of anyone but Mohammed.  Like I say tho, you don't have to take my word for it - there is plenty of scholarly evidence for these things.  And as most really devout Muslims say, the average person can not understand or interpret the Qu'ran - you must consult educated scholars for these things and not draw your own conclusions.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Never read an Hadith in my life(some quotes from some, but never actual reading) and the Qur'an was completely clear to me. And it's not because a large number think the Hadith are to be used to build the Sharia that they necessarily should. I even remember the Qur'an stating something about the Hadiths not being reliable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Qu'ran is far from completely clear.  That's why the Sunnah is necessary and it's also why the Hadith were compiled.  I never said that I thought that the Sharia should be built using the Hadith, Islamic scholars themselves state this.  Even Mohammed himself admitted that you need the Sunnah along with the Qu'ran in order to follow Islam correctly.  If the Qu'ran was complete and clear why the need for the Sunnah?  The Qu'ran mentions nothing about the Hadith being unreliable by the way, what it says is that all you need for life is the Qu'ran.  However as time progressed it became obvious that the Qu'ran did not hold all the answers and it became harder and harder for Scholars to make judgements using only the Qu'ran.  This led to the compilation of the Hadiths.  It's another one of the contradictions in the Qu'ran.  The Qu'ran isn't just a faith and philosophy like most religions are, it is also a totalitarian political regime created by Mohammed.  If you really want a better picture of both Islam and Mohammed read the Qu'ran in the correct order rather than the way it was compiled by Uthman.  It paints a very different picture.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Abrahamic religions usually include Judaism, Christianity and Islam. At least, that's what the general definition is. Don't know enough about Mohammad to answer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That all depends on how you look at it.  Most religious studies include the Book of Mormon as part of the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths lineage.  It all depends on what faith you are looking at it from.  I ask the question because if you include Islam as an official part of the Abrahamic faith it becomes even easier to disprove the god it promotes.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No, and I do remember seeing something in the Qur'an saying that Adam wasn't the first man but the first man to be evolved enough to receive knowledge by God. And something about evolution too. So I would expect at least some Muslims don't believe that either.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What?  Which Qu'ran did you read?  It says no such thing.  In the Qu'ran it states that Adam was the first human created by God's hand and is a literal story.  If I'm not mistaken it was the original Judaic faith that state there were something like 100 generations of man before God breathed conciousness into him creating Adam.  Again tho this version of the creation myth has major holes in it.  You are right however, there are Muslims that don't believe the Adam and Eve story is literal.  I think that's one of the Sufi beliefs.  However, believing in evolution or that Adam and Eve weren't literally created by God usually gets you referred to as a Murtad/Apostate/Kufr by mainstream Islamic sects.

So here's one simple proof that the Abrahamic god can't actually exist, this one is using Islam as an example.  According to the Qu'ran the stars are used to beautify the heavens and are an adornment from God.  These are contained in the lower heavens and the Moon is in their midst.



Spoiler



"He Who created the seven heavens, one above the other ... 
And We have adorned the lowest heaven with lamps ... (67:3,5)"

"Do you not see how God has created the seven heavens 
one above the other, 
and made the moon a light in their midst, 
and made the sun as a lamp? (71:15-16)"



Now, how close is the moon and how close is the nearest star?  Surely the creator of the universe would have known that the nearest star is light years away from us (the Sun) and that the next nearest star is nowhere near the moon.

Or how about the development of a foetus inside the mothers womb.



Spoiler



"Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; 
then of that clot We made a lump; 
then We made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh (23:14)"



Surely the creator of the universe would have known that bones don't develop before flesh inside the womb?

Now if the Abrahamic god didn't know these two simple things then surely he couldn't be the creator of universe.  It's either that or admit that Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran.  If Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran then logic dictates that the Abrahamic god doesn't exist.  There are loads more scientific errors in the Qu'ran besides these.  The reason I choose these ones is because they're the simplest and most people with the slightest education know the answers without having to do any research.

If you'd like though we can say that Mohammed was a false prophet and that Islam isn't canon in the Abrahamic faith and therefore wasn't really inspired by the Abrahamic god so therefore Islam being incorrect isn't proof that the Abrahamic god doesn't and can't exist?


----------



## Jakob95 (May 27, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> I don't have to respect any other religion then my own.  Why do I have to respect your religion when you guys don't respect us.
> QUOTENo, as an evolved being capable of reason, you are entitled to respecting other people's opinions. Most people would agree on that.
> Muslims respect Judaism, they don't respect Israel because of the judeo-palestinian conflict. Respect of other religion is clearly stated in their religious scripture.


Okay, then I do respect the Islamic religion.  I don't respect any of the arab nations that are against Israel.


----------



## Cuelhu (May 27, 2011)

QUOTE(Revelation 13:16-17) said:
			
		

> 16 It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads,17 so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.


It'll come soon, a "mark" which without you would not be able to do commercial transactions. I believe that it'll be some kind of universal ID and even be used as a credit card, but inside your body. Anybody heard of those microchip implants?


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 27, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 27 2011, 07:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 27 2011, 07:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3668367:date=May 27 2011, 01:06 AM:name=pyrmon24)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pyrmon24 @ May 27 2011, 01:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668367"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It isn't gender inequality. The second women is mostly there as backup for the first on. She only has something to do/say IF the first woman makes a mistake or doesn't know what to say. This is explained by the fact that, until very very recently, women didn't have a role AT ALL in anything that had to do with finances, even concerning themselves! Hell, until the 1960s, Canadian women couldn't buy a car without the signature of their husband. In such societies, of course a women can forget this or that about financial stuff. Now things are slightly different, but not that much. In an Islamic nation, men are expected of paying the bills. A woman shouldn't have to go to work to feed a husband who does nothing. That does not mean women are forbidden from working or taking place in financial or political matters or of making decisions as to how a family's money should be spent. Sorry for not being clearer before, but it was late.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Again, it is gender inequality.  What it's saying is that women are mentally deficient enough that there is a high chance that they won't remember all the details, will get nervous and not know what to say and that they need another woman there to "help" them.  And by omitting the same rule for men it's saying that men never suffer from this problem.  Therefore implying that men are mentally and intellectually superior to women.  There are men who would suffer exactly the same problems that women would suffer under the same circumstances, so why not the need for a backup male as well?  However you try to explain this away it will always be gender inequality as gender inequality is defined.  The whole notion of the 1 man = 2 woman witness in the Sharia is sexist and prejudicial.

And going on about the other things only distracts from the original point and in no way offers proof that women are mentally deficient to the point where they need backup to give witness.  All that does is show that as a society we were mistaken in our attitude towards women.  Luckily our societies are fluid and morphous.  Nothing is set in stone and with effort and understanding it can be changed and corrected.  However this isn't the case with an Islamic society as what's in the Qu'ran now is what was and what will always be in the Qu'ran.  The Islamic ideology and belief system is set in stone and as it's the "immutable word of God" can not be questioned, judged or corrected.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The reason is mostly biological. In Islam, marrying means, hopefully, starting a family. The very point of marriage is an union between two(or more) people that are in love to make children, ultimate fruit of that love. A woman only being able to be pregnant from on man at a time, having several husbands would be simply pointless. But a man having several wives can get a child from every one of them at the same time. But, again, marrying a second wife requires that your first wife is ok with it and means you must treat them equally, not proffering one over another. Call it inequality if you want, I think it makes sense.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

For most cultures and societies marrying means starting a family, it's not exclusive to Islam.  I totally agree that marriage is a union between two people that are in love.  However as far as I'm concerned THAT is the fruit of their love.  Having children is a bonus.  What you're basically saying is that 2 people who marry but can't conceive shouldn't actually be considered married because the whole point of being married is to have children.  The whole point of being married is to show that you love and care for the person you're marrying so much that you want to be considered a union.  Marriage stopped being a purely religious ceremony decades ago, or in most modern nations it has anyway.

I totally agree that women can only have one child at a time.  However it wouldn't stop a woman with 2 husbands having a child from each of them.  All it would mean is that the numbers wouldn't increase at a rapid rate ie.  Instead of 4 children born a year it would be 1.  So theoretically it wouldn't be pointless because each Man would still be able to have a child or children with the woman he loves.  There would still be a solid loving family unit.  And unless I'm mistaken that's the whole point of marriage.  The only reason to prefer a man with many wives over a woman with many husbands would be because the number of births would be higher.  In an already over-populated world wouldn't lower birthrates be a better thing than a rapidly increasing population?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Read above.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Again, there are plenty of women who could more than equitable between all of her husbands.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Islam teaches that men must care for women. This does not remove them of any right, only that men should be gallant towards women and be the ones to pay. In an Islamic world, men have more financial responsibility(in a marriage). Besides, the half of a man's share thing is really a bare minimum. The deceased can give how much he wants to whomever he wants, but he needs to give these minimum shares.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

At the time Mohammed wrote (or dictated if you want to get semantic) the Qu'ran that's how society was.  However as I've stated before society has moved on from these times.  Society is now at a point where women are more than capable of caring for themselves.  The whole hunter/gatherer idea of the Male is long gone in modern society.  Life in this day age is completely unrecognisable compared to life back then.  In this day and age women play an equal role with regards to supporting themselves and their families.  I should introduce you to my sister.  She looks after her two children, her terminally ill husband, helps out in the local community, helps my parents and much much more.  There is no such thing as a gender specific role with regards to the family unit any more, society has progressed.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The verses that are linked to the Hijab don't really talk about the Hijab and only a bad interpretation leads to the Hijab. I read them, they don't talk about head coverings.[/b] Unless you feel like reading those verses and deciding for yourself whether they mention the Hijab, you'll have to take my word for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've read the verses.  When it comes to religion I rarely take anyones word for anything.  I've actually read the Qu'ran several times.  I haven't had a chance to read all the Hadiths yet, but that's an awful lot of material to work through obviously.  Here is one of the verses regarding women's "modesty" and the one most commonly used to support the need for both the Hijab and the Burkha.



Spoiler



“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31)



It says that women should not display their beauty and ornaments (ornaments meaning jewellery) except what must ordinarily appear and that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to family members.  As the hair is not something that must ordinarily appear in order to carry on with day to day life then it's saying that it must be covered.  However, you don't have to take my word for it.  Feel free to have a read through the many many many things that Islamic scholars have written on the subject.  All Islamic scholars from the Sunni and Shi'ite sects agree that it means the Hijab is a necessary part of the female uniform for Islamic women.  Salafi/Wahabbi belief goes further obviously stating that the word veil does indeed refer to a face covering and therefore the Niqab (most people mistake the Niqab for the Burkha in western society) is what women should be wearing.  If you read further on in the Qu'ran it states that the Burkha is necessary for Mohammeds wives as they should be completely shielded from the eyes of anyone but Mohammed.  Like I say tho, you don't have to take my word for it - there is plenty of scholarly evidence for these things.  And as most really devout Muslims say, the average person can not understand or interpret the Qu'ran - you must consult educated scholars for these things and not draw your own conclusions.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Never read an Hadith in my life(some quotes from some, but never actual reading) and the Qur'an was completely clear to me. And it's not because a large number think the Hadith are to be used to build the Sharia that they necessarily should. I even remember the Qur'an stating something about the Hadiths not being reliable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Qu'ran is far from completely clear.  That's why the Sunnah is necessary and it's also why the Hadith were compiled.  I never said that I thought that the Sharia should be built using the Hadith, Islamic scholars themselves state this.  Even Mohammed himself admitted that you need the Sunnah along with the Qu'ran in order to follow Islam correctly.  If the Qu'ran was complete and clear why the need for the Sunnah?  The Qu'ran mentions nothing about the Hadith being unreliable by the way, what it says is that all you need for life is the Qu'ran.  However as time progressed it became obvious that the Qu'ran did not hold all the answers and it became harder and harder for Scholars to make judgements using only the Qu'ran.  This led to the compilation of the Hadiths.  It's another one of the contradictions in the Qu'ran.  The Qu'ran isn't just a faith and philosophy like most religions are, it is also a totalitarian political regime created by Mohammed.  If you really want a better picture of both Islam and Mohammed read the Qu'ran in the correct order rather than the way it was compiled by Uthman.  It paints a very different picture.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Abrahamic religions usually include Judaism, Christianity and Islam. At least, that's what the general definition is. Don't know enough about Mohammad to answer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That all depends on how you look at it.  Most religious studies include the Book of Mormon as part of the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths lineage.  It all depends on what faith you are looking at it from.  I ask the question because if you include Islam as an official part of the Abrahamic faith it becomes even easier to disprove the god it promotes.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No, and I do remember seeing something in the Qur'an saying that Adam wasn't the first man but the first man to be evolved enough to receive knowledge by God. And something about evolution too. So I would expect at least some Muslims don't believe that either.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What?  Which Qu'ran did you read?  It says no such thing.  In the Qu'ran it states that Adam was the first human created by God's hand and is a literal story.  If I'm not mistaken it was the original Judaic faith that state there were something like 100 generations of man before God breathed conciousness into him creating Adam.  Again tho this version of the creation myth has major holes in it.  You are right however, there are Muslims that don't believe the Adam and Eve story is literal.  I think that's one of the Sufi beliefs.  However, believing in evolution or that Adam and Eve weren't literally created by God usually gets you referred to as a Murtad/Apostate/Kufr by mainstream Islamic sects.

So here's one simple proof that the Abrahamic god can't actually exist, this one is using Islam as an example.  According to the Qu'ran the stars are used to beautify the heavens and are an adornment from God.  These are contained in the lower heavens and the Moon is in their midst.



Spoiler



"He Who created the seven heavens, one above the other ... 
And We have adorned the lowest heaven with lamps ... (67:3,5)"

"Do you not see how God has created the seven heavens 
one above the other, 
and made the moon a light in their midst, 
and made the sun as a lamp? (71:15-16)"



Now, how close is the moon and how close is the nearest star?  Surely the creator of the universe would have known that the nearest star is light years away from us (the Sun) and that the next nearest star is nowhere near the moon.

Or how about the development of a foetus inside the mothers womb.



Spoiler



"Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; 
then of that clot We made a lump; 
then We made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh (23:14)"



Surely the creator of the universe would have known that bones don't develop before flesh inside the womb?

Now if the Abrahamic god didn't know these two simple things then surely he couldn't be the creator of universe.  It's either that or admit that Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran.  If Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran then logic dictates that the Abrahamic god doesn't exist.  There are loads more scientific errors in the Qu'ran besides these.  The reason I choose these ones is because they're the simplest and most people with the slightest education know the answers without having to do any research.

If you'd like though we can say that Mohammed was a false prophet and that Islam isn't canon in the Abrahamic faith and therefore wasn't really inspired by the Abrahamic god so therefore Islam being incorrect isn't proof that the Abrahamic god doesn't and can't exist?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


This is a detailed note on the rights of women in Islam,by reading this does it seem that women are a victim of inequality in Islam. 
A scholar who pondered about this verse states: "It is believed that there is no text, old or new, that deals with the humanity of the woman from all aspects with such amazing brevity, eloquence, depth, and originality as this divine decree."

Stressing this noble and natural conception, them Qur'an states:

He (God) it is who did create you from a single soul and therefrom did create his mate, that he might dwell with her (in love)...(Qur'an 7:189)

The Creator of heavens and earth: He has made for you pairs from among yourselves ...Qur'an 42:1 1

And Allah has given you mates of your own nature, and has given you from your mates, children and grandchildren, and has made provision of good things for you. Is it then in vanity that they believe and in the grace of God that they disbelieve? Qur'an 16:72

The rest of this paper outlines the position of Islam regarding the status of woman in society from its various aspects - spiritually, socially, economically and politically.


1. The Spiritual Aspect

The Qur'an provides clear-cut evidence that woman iscompletely equated with man in the sight of God interms of her rights and responsibilities. The Qur'an states:

"Every soul will be (held) in pledge for its deeds" (Qur'an 74:38). It also states:

...So their Lord accepted their prayers, (saying): I will not suffer to be lost the work of any of you whether male or female. You proceed one from another ...(Qur'an 3: 195).

Whoever works righteousness, man or woman, and has faith, verily to him will We give a new life that is good and pure, and We will bestow on such their reward according to the their actions. (Qur'an 16:97, see also 4:124).

Woman according to the Qur'an is not blamed for Adam's first mistake. Both were jointly wrong in their disobedience to God, both repented, and both were forgiven. (Qur'an 2:36, 7:20 - 24). In one verse in fact (20:121), Adam specifically, was blamed.

In terms of religious obligations, such as the Daily Prayers, Fasting, Poor-due, and Pilgrimage, woman is no different from man. In some cases indeed, woman has certain advantages over man. For example, the woman is exempted from the daily prayers and from fasting during her menstrual periods and forty days after childbirth. She is also exempted from fasting during her pregnancy and when she is nursing her baby if there is any threat to her health or her baby's. If the missed fasting is obligatory (during the month of Ramadan), she can make up for the missed days whenever she can. She does not have to make up for the prayers missed for any of the above reasons. Although women can and did go into the mosque during the days of the prophet and thereafter attendance et the Friday congregational prayers is optional for them while it is mandatory for men (on Friday).

This is clearly a tender touch of the Islamic teachings for they are considerate of the fact that a woman may be nursing her baby or caring for him, and thus may be unable to go out to the mosque at the time of the prayers. They also take into account the physiological and psychological changes associated with her natural female functions.


2. The Social Aspect

a) As a child and an adolescent

Despite the social acceptance of female infanticide among some Arabian tribes, the Qur'an forbade this custom, and considered it a crime like any other murder.

"And when the female (infant) buried alive - is questioned, for what crime she was killed." (Qur'an 81:8-9). 

Criticizing the attitudes of such parents who reject their female children, the Qur'an states:

When news is brought to one of them, of (the Birth of) a female (child), his face darkens and he is filled with inward grief! With shame does he hide himself from his people because of the bad news he has had! Shall he retain her on (sufferance) and contempt, or bury her in the dust? Ah! What an evil (choice) they decide on? (Qur'an 16: 58-59). 

Far from saving the girl's life so that she may later suffer injustice and inequality, Islam requires kind and just treatment for her. Among the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (P.) in this regard are the following:

Whosoever has a daughter and he does not bury her alive, does not insult her, and does not favor his son over her, God will enter him into Paradise. (Ibn Hanbal, No. 1957).

Whosoever supports two daughters till they mature, he and I will come in the day of judgment as this (and he pointed with his two fingers held together).

A similar Hadeeth deals in like manner with one who supports two sisters. (Ibn-Hanbal, No. 2104).

The right of females to seek knowledge is not different from that of males. Prophet Muhammad (P.) said:

"Seeking knowledge is mandatory for every Muslim". (AlBayhaqi). Muslim as used here including both males and females. 

b) As a wife:

The Qur'an clearly indicates that marriage is sharing between the two halves of the society, and that its objectives, beside perpetuating human life, are emotional well-being and spiritual harmony. Its bases are love and mercy.

Among the most impressive verses in the Qur'an about marriage is the following.

"And among His signs is this: That He created mates for you from yourselves that you may find rest, peace of mind in them, and He ordained between you love and mercy. Lo, herein indeed are signs for people who reflect." (Qur'an 30:2 1). 

According to Islamic Law, women cannot be forced to marry anyone without their consent.

Ibn Abbas reported that a girl came to the Messenger of God, Muhammad (P.), and she reported that her father had forced her to marry without her consent. The Messenger of God gave her the choice . . . (between accepting the marriage or invalidating it). (Ibn Hanbal No. 2469). In another version, the girl said: "Actually I accept this marriage but I wanted to let women know that parents have no right (to force a husband on them)" (Ibn Maja, No. 1873).

Besides all other provisions for her protection at the time of marriage, it was specifically decreed that woman has the full right to her Mahr, a marriage gift, which is presented to her by her husband and is included in the nuptial contract, and that such ownership does not transfer to her father or husband. The concept of Mahr in Islam is neither an actual or symbolic price for the woman, as was the case in certain cultures, but rather it is a gift symbolizing love and affection.

The rules for married life in Islam are clear and in harmony with upright human nature. In consideration of the physiological and psychological make-up of man and woman, both have equal rights and claims on one another, except for one responsibility, that of leadership. This is a matter which is natural in any collective life and which is consistent with the nature of man.

The Qur'an thus states:

"And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them, and men are a degree above them." (Qur'an 2:228). 

Such degree is Quiwama (maintenance and protection). This refers to that natural difference between the sexes which entitles the weaker sex to protection. It implies no superiority or advantage before the law. Yet, man's role of leadership in relation to his family does not mean the husband's dictatorship over his wife. Islam emphasizes the importance of taking counsel and mutual agreement in family decisions. The Qur'an gives us an example:

"...If they (husband wife) desire to wean the child by mutual consent and (after) consultation, there is no blame on them..." (Qur'an 2: 233). 

Over and above her basic rights as a wife comes the right which is emphasized by the Qur'an and is strongly recommended by the Prophet (P); kind treatment and companionship.

The Qur'an states:

"...But consort with them in kindness, for if you hate them it may happen that you hate a thing wherein God has placed much good." (Qur'an 4: l9).


Prophet Muhammad. (P) said:

The best of you is the best to his family and I am the best among you to my family.

The most perfect believers are the best in conduct and best of you are those who are best to their wives. (Ibn-Hanbal, No. 7396)

Behold, many women came to Muhammad's wives complaining against their husbands (because they beat them) - - those (husbands) are not the best of you.

As the woman's right to decide about her marriage is recognized, so also her right to seek an end for an unsuccessful marriage is recognized. To provide for the stability of the family, however, and in order to protect it from hasty decisions under temporary emotional stress, certain steps and waiting periods should be observed by men and women seeking divorce. Considering the relatively more emotional nature of women, a good reason for asking for divorce should be brought before the judge. Like the man, however, the woman can divorce her husband with out resorting to the court, if the nuptial contract allows that.

More specifically, some aspects of Islamic Law concerning marriage and divorce are interesting and are worthy of separate treatment.

When the continuation of the marriage relationship is impossible for any reason, men are still taught to seek a gracious end for it.

The Qur'an states about such cases:

When you divorce women, and they reach their prescribed term, then retain them in kindness and retain them not for injury so that you transgress (the limits). (Qur'an 2:231). (See also Qur'an 2:229 and 33:49). 


c) As a mother:

Islam considered kindness to parents next to the worship of God.

"And we have enjoined upon man (to be good) to his parents: His mother bears him in weakness upon weakness..." (Qur'an 31:14) (See also Qur'an 46:15, 29:8). 

Moreover, the Qur'an has a special recommendation for the good treatment of mothers:

"Your Lord has decreed that you worship none save Him, and that you be kind to your parents. . ." (Qur'an 17:23). 

A man came to Prophet Muhammad (P) asking:

O Messenger of God, who among the people is the most worthy of my good company? The Prophet (P) said, Your mother. The man said then who else: The Prophet (P) said, Your mother. The man asked, Then who else? Only then did the Prophet (P) say, Your father. (Al-Bukhari and Muslim). 

A famous saying of The Prophet is "Paradise is at the feet of mothers." (In Al'Nisa'I, Ibn Majah, Ahmad).

"It is the generous (in character) who is good to women, and it is the wicked who insults them."


3. The Economic Aspect

Islam decreed a right of which woman was deprived both before Islam and after it (even as late as this century), the right of independent ownership. According to Islamic Law, woman's right to her money, real estate, or other properties is fully acknowledged. This right undergoes no change whether she is single or married. She retains her full rights to buy, sell, mortgage or lease any or all her properties. It is nowhere suggested in the Law that a woman is a minor simply because she is a female. It is also noteworthy that such right applies to her properties before marriage as well as to whatever she acquires thereafter.

With regard to the woman's right to seek employment it should be stated first that Islam regards her role in society as a mother and a wife as the most sacred and essential one. Neither maids nor baby-sitters can possibly take the mother's place as the educator of an upright, complex free, and carefully-reared children. Such a noble and vital role, which largely shapes the future of nations, cannot be regarded as "idleness".

However, there is no decree in Islam which forbids woman from seeking employment whenever there is a necessity for it, especially in positions which fit her nature and in which society needs her most. Examples of these professions are nursing, teaching (especially for children), and medicine. Moreover, there is no restriction on benefiting from woman's exceptional talent in any field. Even for the position of a judge, where there may be a tendency to doubt the woman's fitness for the post due to her more emotional nature, we find early Muslim scholars such as Abu-Hanifa and Al-Tabary holding there is nothing wrong with it. In addition, Islam restored to woman the right of inheritance, after she herself was an object of inheritance in some cultures. Her share is completely hers and no one can make any claim on it, including her father and her husband.

"Unto men (of the family) belongs a share of that which Parents and near kindred leave, and unto women a share of that which parents and near kindred leave, whether it be a little or much - a determinate share." ((Qur'an 4:7). 

Her share in most cases is one-half the man's share, with no implication that she is worth half a man! It would seem grossly inconsistent after the overwhelming evidence of woman's equitable treatment in Islam, which was discussed in the preceding pages, to make such an inference. This variation in inheritance rights is only consistent with the variations in financial responsibilities of man and woman according to the Islamic Law. Man in Islam is fully responsible for the maintenance of his wife, his children, and in some cases of his needy relatives, especially the females. This responsibility is neither waived nor reduced because of his wife's wealth or because of her access to any personal income gained from work, rent, profit, or any other legal means.

Woman, on the other hand, is far more secure financially and is far less burdened with any claims on her possessions. Her possessions before marriage do not transfer to her husband and she even keeps her maiden name. She has no obligation to spend on her family out of such properties or out of her income after marriage. She is entitled to the "Mahr" which she takes from her husband at the time of marriage. If she is divorced, she may get an alimony from her ex-husband.

An examination of the inheritance law within the overall framework of the Islamic Law reveals not only justice but also an abundance of compassion for woman.


4. The Political Aspect

Any fair investigation of the teachings of Islam o~ into the history of the Islamic civilization will surely find a clear evidence of woman's equality with man in what we call today "political rights".

This includes the right of election as well as the nomination to political offices. It also includes woman's right to participate in public affairs. Both in the Qur'an and in Islamic history we find examples of women who participated in serious discussions and argued even with the Prophet (P) himself, (see Qur'an 58: 14 and 60: 10-12).

During the Caliphate of Omar Ibn al-Khattab, a woman argued with him in the mosque, proved her point, and caused him to declare in the presence of people: "A woman is right and Omar is wrong."

Although not mentioned in the Qur'an, one Hadeeth of the Prophet is interpreted to make woman ineligible for the position of head of state. The Hadeeth referred to is roughly translated: "A people will not prosper if they let a woman be their leader." This limitation, however, has nothing to do with the dignity of woman or with her rights. It is rather, related to the natural differences in the biological and psychological make-up of men and women.

According to Islam, the head of the state is no mere figurehead. He leads people in the prayers, especially on Fridays and festivities; he is continuously engaged in the process of decision-making pertaining to the security and well-being of his people. This demanding position, or any similar one, such as the Commander of the Army, is generally inconsistent with the physiological and psychological make-up of woman in general. It is a medical fact that during their monthly periods and during their pregnancies, women undergo various physiological and psychological changes. Such changes may occur during an emergency situation, thus affecting her decision, without considering the excessive strain which is produced. Moreover, some decisions require a maximum of rationality and a minimum of emotionality - a requirement which does not coincide with the instinctive nature of women.

Even in modern times, and in the most developed countries, it is rare to find a woman in the position of a head of state acting as more than a figurehead, a woman commander of the armed services, or even a proportionate number of women representatives in parliaments, or similar bodies. One can not possibly ascribe this to backwardness of various nations or to any constitutional limitation on woman's right to be in such a position as a head of state or as a member of the parliament. It is more logical to explain the present situation in terms of the natural and indisputable differences between man and woman, a difference which does not imply any "supremacy" of one over the other. The difference implies rather the "complementary" roles of both the sexes in life.


The scientific errors you have stated can be proven wrong.....If you want me to,then i can post videos to prove that???


----------



## leeday100196 (May 27, 2011)

Boring. Just another point of view on the end of the world, yawn, let's not speculate and just sit back and enjoy the ride.


----------



## Magmorph (May 27, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> Now, how close is the moon and how close is the nearest star?  Surely the creator of the universe would have known that the nearest star is light years away from us (the Sun) and that the next nearest star is nowhere near the moon.


The Sun is not light years away from us. You must be thinking of Alpha Centauri.


----------



## AlanJohn (May 27, 2011)

leeday100196 said:
			
		

> Boring. Just another point of view on the end of the world, yawn, let's not speculate and just sit back and enjoy the ride.


This.

Why do we always have to fear something that would probably not happen?
Why can't we just sit back and enjoy the ride?


----------



## TrolleyDave (May 28, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> This is a detailed note on the rights of women in Islam,by reading this does it seem that women are a victim of inequality in Islam.
> A scholar who pondered about this verse states: "It is believed that there is no text, old or new, that deals with the humanity of the woman from all aspects with such amazing brevity, eloquence, depth, and originality as this divine decree."
> 
> Stressing this noble and natural conception, them Qur'an states:
> ...



Stop with that shit.  Stop being so concerned about the end of the universe and your life and start being more concerned about the future of them!


----------



## Pyrmon (May 28, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh, thaaaat's why.


----------



## koimayeul (May 28, 2011)

my hamster pee on my couch, tis a sign!!


----------



## epicCreations.or (May 28, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> Now if the Abrahamic god didn't know these two simple things then surely he couldn't be the creator of universe.  *It's either that or admit that Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran.  If Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran then logic dictates that the Abrahamic god doesn't exist*.  There are loads more scientific errors in the Qu'ran besides these.  The reason I choose these ones is because they're the simplest and most people with the slightest education know the answers without having to do any research.
> 
> If you'd like though we can say that Mohammed was a false prophet and that Islam isn't canon in the Abrahamic faith and therefore wasn't really inspired by the Abrahamic god so therefore Islam being incorrect isn't proof that the Abrahamic god doesn't and can't exist?


WTF? This makes no sense at all. If Islam came after, then why would it dictate that what came before doesn't exist?


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 28, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 27 2011, 07:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 27 2011, 07:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3668367:date=May 27 2011, 01:06 AM:name=pyrmon24)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pyrmon24 @ May 27 2011, 01:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668367"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It isn't gender inequality. The second women is mostly there as backup for the first on. She only has something to do/say IF the first woman makes a mistake or doesn't know what to say. This is explained by the fact that, until very very recently, women didn't have a role AT ALL in anything that had to do with finances, even concerning themselves! Hell, until the 1960s, Canadian women couldn't buy a car without the signature of their husband. In such societies, of course a women can forget this or that about financial stuff. Now things are slightly different, but not that much. In an Islamic nation, men are expected of paying the bills. A woman shouldn't have to go to work to feed a husband who does nothing. That does not mean women are forbidden from working or taking place in financial or political matters or of making decisions as to how a family's money should be spent. Sorry for not being clearer before, but it was late.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again, it is gender inequality.  What it's saying is that women are mentally deficient enough that there is a high chance that they won't remember all the details, will get nervous and not know what to say and that they need another woman there to "help" them.  And by omitting the same rule for men it's saying that men never suffer from this problem.  Therefore implying that men are mentally and intellectually superior to women.  There are men who would suffer exactly the same problems that women would suffer under the same circumstances, so why not the need for a backup male as well?  However you try to explain this away it will always be gender inequality as gender inequality is defined.  The whole notion of the 1 man = 2 woman witness in the Sharia is sexist and prejudicial.

And going on about the other things only distracts from the original point and in no way offers proof that women are mentally deficient to the point where they need backup to give witness.  All that does is show that as a society we were mistaken in our attitude towards women.  Luckily our societies are fluid and morphous.  Nothing is set in stone and with effort and understanding it can be changed and corrected.  However this isn't the case with an Islamic society as what's in the Qu'ran now is what was and what will always be in the Qu'ran.  The Islamic ideology and belief system is set in stone and as it's the "immutable word of God" can not be questioned, judged or corrected.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The reason is mostly biological. In Islam, marrying means, hopefully, starting a family. The very point of marriage is an union between two(or more) people that are in love to make children, ultimate fruit of that love. A woman only being able to be pregnant from on man at a time, having several husbands would be simply pointless. But a man having several wives can get a child from every one of them at the same time. But, again, marrying a second wife requires that your first wife is ok with it and means you must treat them equally, not proffering one over another. Call it inequality if you want, I think it makes sense.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

For most cultures and societies marrying means starting a family, it's not exclusive to Islam.  I totally agree that marriage is a union between two people that are in love.  However as far as I'm concerned THAT is the fruit of their love.  Having children is a bonus.  What you're basically saying is that 2 people who marry but can't conceive shouldn't actually be considered married because the whole point of being married is to have children.  The whole point of being married is to show that you love and care for the person you're marrying so much that you want to be considered a union.  Marriage stopped being a purely religious ceremony decades ago, or in most modern nations it has anyway.


I totally agree that women can only have one child at a time.  However it wouldn't stop a woman with 2 husbands having a child from each of them.  All it would mean is that the numbers wouldn't increase at a rapid rate ie.  Instead of 4 children born a year it would be 1.  So theoretically it wouldn't be pointless because each Man would still be able to have a child or children with the woman he loves.  There would still be a solid loving family unit.  And unless I'm mistaken that's the whole point of marriage.  The only reason to prefer a man with many wives over a woman with many husbands would be because the number of births would be higher.  In an already over-populated world wouldn't lower birthrates be a better thing than a rapidly increasing population?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Read above.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again, there are plenty of women who could more than equitable between all of her husbands.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Islam teaches that men must care for women. This does not remove them of any right, only that men should be gallant towards women and be the ones to pay. In an Islamic world, men have more financial responsibility(in a marriage). Besides, the half of a man's share thing is really a bare minimum. The deceased can give how much he wants to whomever he wants, but he needs to give these minimum shares.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

At the time Mohammed wrote (or dictated if you want to get semantic) the Qu'ran that's how society was.  However as I've stated before society has moved on from these times.  Society is now at a point where women are more than capable of caring for themselves.  The whole hunter/gatherer idea of the Male is long gone in modern society.  Life in this day age is completely unrecognisable compared to life back then.  In this day and age women play an equal role with regards to supporting themselves and their families.  I should introduce you to my sister.  She looks after her two children, her terminally ill husband, helps out in the local community, helps my parents and much much more.  There is no such thing as a gender specific role with regards to the family unit any more, society has progressed.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The verses that are linked to the Hijab don't really talk about the Hijab and only a bad interpretation leads to the Hijab. I read them, they don't talk about head coverings.[/b] Unless you feel like reading those verses and deciding for yourself whether they mention the Hijab, you'll have to take my word for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've read the verses.  When it comes to religion I rarely take anyones word for anything.  I've actually read the Qu'ran several times.  I haven't had a chance to read all the Hadiths yet, but that's an awful lot of material to work through obviously.  Here is one of the verses regarding women's "modesty" and the one most commonly used to support the need for both the Hijab and the Burkha.



Spoiler



“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31)



<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It says that women should not display their beauty and ornaments (ornaments meaning jewellery) except what must ordinarily appear and that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to family members.  As the hair is not something that must ordinarily appear in order to carry on with day to day life then it's saying that it must be covered.  However, you don't have to take my word for it.  Feel free to have a read through the many many many things that Islamic scholars have written on the subject.  All Islamic scholars from the Sunni and Shi'ite sects agree that it means the Hijab is a necessary part of the female uniform for Islamic women.  Salafi/Wahabbi belief goes further obviously stating that the word veil does indeed refer to a face covering and therefore the Niqab (most people mistake the Niqab for the Burkha in western society) is what women should be wearing.  If you read further on in the Qu'ran it states that the Burkha is necessary for Mohammeds wives as they should be completely shielded from the eyes of anyone but Mohammed.  Like I say tho, you don't have to take my word for it - there is plenty of scholarly evidence for these things.  And as most really devout Muslims say, the average person can not understand or interpret the Qu'ran - you must consult educated scholars for these things and not draw your own conclusions.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Never read an Hadith in my life(some quotes from some, but never actual reading) and the Qur'an was completely clear to me. And it's not because a large number think the Hadith are to be used to build the Sharia that they necessarily should. I even remember the Qur'an stating something about the Hadiths not being reliable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Qu'ran is far from completely clear.  That's why the Sunnah is necessary and it's also why the Hadith were compiled.  I never said that I thought that the Sharia should be built using the Hadith, Islamic scholars themselves state this.  Even Mohammed himself admitted that you need the Sunnah along with the Qu'ran in order to follow Islam correctly.  If the Qu'ran was complete and clear why the need for the Sunnah?  The Qu'ran mentions nothing about the Hadith being unreliable by the way, what it says is that all you need for life is the Qu'ran.  However as time progressed it became obvious that the Qu'ran did not hold all the answers and it became harder and harder for Scholars to make judgements using only the Qu'ran.  This led to the compilation of the Hadiths.  It's another one of the contradictions in the Qu'ran.  The Qu'ran isn't just a faith and philosophy like most religions are, it is also a totalitarian political regime created by Mohammed.  If you really want a better picture of both Islam and Mohammed read the Qu'ran in the correct order rather than the way it was compiled by Uthman.  It paints a very different picture.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Abrahamic religions usually include Judaism, Christianity and Islam. At least, that's what the general definition is. Don't know enough about Mohammad to answer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That all depends on how you look at it.  Most religious studies include the Book of Mormon as part of the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths lineage.  It all depends on what faith you are looking at it from.  I ask the question because if you include Islam as an official part of the Abrahamic faith it becomes even easier to disprove the god it promotes.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No, and I do remember seeing something in the Qur'an saying that Adam wasn't the first man but the first man to be evolved enough to receive knowledge by God. And something about evolution too. So I would expect at least some Muslims don't believe that either.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What?  Which Qu'ran did you read?  It says no such thing.  In the Qu'ran it states that Adam was the first human created by God's hand and is a literal story.  If I'm not mistaken it was the original Judaic faith that state there were something like 100 generations of man before God breathed conciousness into him creating Adam.  Again tho this version of the creation myth has major holes in it.  You are right however, there are Muslims that don't believe the Adam and Eve story is literal.  I think that's one of the Sufi beliefs.  However, believing in evolution or that Adam and Eve weren't literally created by God usually gets you referred to as a Murtad/Apostate/Kufr by mainstream Islamic sects.

So here's one simple proof that the Abrahamic god can't actually exist, this one is using Islam as an example.  According to the Qu'ran the stars are used to beautify the heavens and are an adornment from God.  These are contained in the lower heavens and the Moon is in their midst.



Spoiler



"He Who created the seven heavens, one above the other ... 
And We have adorned the lowest heaven with lamps ... (67:3,5)"

"Do you not see how God has created the seven heavens 
one above the other, 
and made the moon a light in their midst, 
and made the sun as a lamp? (71:15-16)"



Now, how close is the moon and how close is the nearest star?  Surely the creator of the universe would have known that the nearest star is light years away from us (the Sun) and that the next nearest star is nowhere near the moon.

Or how about the development of a foetus inside the mothers womb.



Spoiler



"Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; 
then of that clot We made a lump; 
then We made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh (23:14)"



Surely the creator of the universe would have known that bones don't develop before flesh inside the womb?

Now if the Abrahamic god didn't know these two simple things then surely he couldn't be the creator of universe.  It's either that or admit that Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran.  If Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran then logic dictates that the Abrahamic god doesn't exist.  There are loads more scientific errors in the Qu'ran besides these.  The reason I choose these ones is because they're the simplest and most people with the slightest education know the answers without having to do any research.

If you'd like though we can say that Mohammed was a false prophet and that Islam isn't canon in the Abrahamic faith and therefore wasn't really inspired by the Abrahamic god so therefore Islam being incorrect isn't proof that the Abrahamic god doesn't and can't exist?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<b>The origin of your point,why are there two women witnesses to a single men....are the women mentally deficient....here is the answer:


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyMfZCNahds[/youtube]


</b>

<b>Why is Polygamy allowed in Islam(It gives the answer why women don't marry more than one man):


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQaPBU5ppsk[/youtube]


</b>

<b>This is what Islam teaches about Hijab and why is it important:


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp5ORAqZIlA[/youtube]


</b>

<b>As far as Embryology is concerned.....HERE IS A PROOF OF ITS AUTHENTICITY:


Spoiler



Part 1[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLEuuLj0GCI[/youtube]  
Part 2[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pag3hKMF0pA[/youtube]


</b>

<b>Anyone who can challenge this Quranic Fact(proved by Science):


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnFhhDK2J3c&feature=related[/youtube]


</b>

I would like to know more scientific errors you know that are in the Holy Qur'an.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 29, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again, it is gender inequality.  What it's saying is that women are mentally deficient enough that there is a high chance that they won't remember all the details, will get nervous and not know what to say and that they need another woman there to "help" them.  And by omitting the same rule for men it's saying that men never suffer from this problem.  Therefore implying that men are mentally and intellectually superior to women.  There are men who would suffer exactly the same problems that women would suffer under the same circumstances, so why not the need for a backup male as well?  However you try to explain this away it will always be gender inequality as gender inequality is defined.  The whole notion of the 1 man = 2 woman witness in the Sharia is sexist and prejudicial.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First of all, there are either two men or one man and two women that must be witnesses. Therefore, men also oblige by the same rule. There needs two women witnesses instead of one man witness because women, especially back then, have generally less knowledge of finances than men. Besides, the two women rule makes sense once you take the risk that one of the women could be married/or will marry the man that was a witness, therefore making her testimony biased.

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For most cultures and societies marrying means starting a family, it's not exclusive to Islam.  I totally agree that marriage is a union between two people that are in love.  However as far as I'm concerned THAT is the fruit of their love.  Having children is a bonus.  What you're basically saying is that 2 people who marry but can't conceive shouldn't actually be considered married because the whole point of being married is to have children.  The whole point of being married is to show that you love and care for the person you're marrying so much that you want to be considered a union.  Marriage stopped being a purely religious ceremony decades ago, or in most modern nations it has anyway.

I totally agree that women can only have one child at a time.  However it wouldn't stop a woman with 2 husbands having a child from each of them.  All it would mean is that the numbers wouldn't increase at a rapid rate ie.  Instead of 4 children born a year it would be 1.  So theoretically it wouldn't be pointless because each Man would still be able to have a child or children with the woman he loves.  There would still be a solid loving family unit.  And unless I'm mistaken that's the whole point of marriage.  The only reason to prefer a man with many wives over a woman with many husbands would be because the number of births would be higher.  In an already over-populated world wouldn't lower birthrates be a better thing than a rapidly increasing population?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Quran strongly discourages polygamy. Polygamy was a way of life until the Quran was revealed 1400 years ago. It was advocated and practiced by the followers of the previous scriptures. In all the scriptures, the men were allowed to have more than one wife and not vise verse, since the idea of polygamy then was to populate the earth. As we know a woman can be pregnant only once a year even if she is married to four men but one man can have four children in the process at the same time if he is married to four wives. Polygamy was never meant to be abused for sexual pleasure or prove superiority.

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->At the time Mohammed wrote (or dictated if you want to get semantic) the Qu'ran that's how society was.  However as I've stated before society has moved on from these times.  Society is now at a point where women are more than capable of caring for themselves.  The whole hunter/gatherer idea of the Male is long gone in modern society.  Life in this day age is completely unrecognisable compared to life back then.  In this day and age women play an equal role with regards to supporting themselves and their families.  I should introduce you to my sister.  She looks after her two children, her terminally ill husband, helps out in the local community, helps my parents and much much more.  There is no such thing as a gender specific role with regards to the family unit any more, society has progressed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is a common misconception even among the traditional Muslims themselves. The Quran gives the parents total freedom to give their children as much as they see fit even if this means giving the females double what the males would get. The Quran, however, commands that if a will is NOT left, then the estate is distributed in such a manner that the son gets double what the daughter gets. Generally, the son is responsible for a family, while the daughter is taken care of by a husband or her family. However, the Quran recommends in 2:180 that a will shall be left to conform with the specific circumstances of the deceased. For example, if the son is rich and the daughter is poor, one may leave a will giving the daughter everything, or twice as much as the son. 

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've read the verses.  When it comes to religion I rarely take anyones word for anything.  I've actually read the Qu'ran several times.  I haven't had a chance to read all the Hadiths yet, but that's an awful lot of material to work through obviously.  Here is one of the verses regarding women's "modesty" and the one most commonly used to support the need for both the Hijab and the Burkha.

It says that women should not display their beauty and ornaments (ornaments meaning jewellery) except what must ordinarily appear and that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to family members.  As the hair is not something that must ordinarily appear in order to carry on with day to day life then it's saying that it must be covered.  However, you don't have to take my word for it.  Feel free to have a read through the many many many things that Islamic scholars have written on the subject.  All Islamic scholars from the Sunni and Shi'ite sects agree that it means the Hijab is a necessary part of the female uniform for Islamic women.  Salafi/Wahabbi belief goes further obviously stating that the word veil does indeed refer to a face covering and therefore the Niqab (most people mistake the Niqab for the Burkha in western society) is what women should be wearing.  If you read further on in the Qu'ran it states that the Burkha is necessary for Mohammeds wives as they should be completely shielded from the eyes of anyone but Mohammed.  Like I say tho, you don't have to take my word for it - there is plenty of scholarly evidence for these things.  And as most really devout Muslims say, the average person can not understand or interpret the Qu'ran - you must consult educated scholars for these things and not draw your own conclusions.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Here is the verse you posted with an addition:


Spoiler



“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils(arabic word is khumur) over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31)



The noun khimar (of which khumur is plural) denotes the head-covering customarily used by Arabian women as an ornament (not as hijab to cover their head) before and after the advent of Islam. According to most of the classical commentators, it was worn in pre-Islamic times more or less as an ornament and was let down loosely over the wearer's back; and since, in accordance with the fashion prevalent at the time, the upper part of a woman's tunic had a wide opening in the front, her chest was left bare. Hence, the injunction to cover the bosom by means of a khimar (a term so familiar to the contemporaries of the Prophet) does not necessarily relate to the use of a khimar as such but is, rather, meant to make it clear that a woman's chest is not included in the concept of "what may decently be apparent" of her body and should not, therefore, be displayed. Covering of the head, therefore is not a requirement.

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran is far from completely clear.  That's why the Sunnah is necessary and it's also why the Hadith were compiled.  I never said that I thought that the Sharia should be built using the Hadith, Islamic scholars themselves state this.  Even Mohammed himself admitted that you need the Sunnah along with the Qu'ran in order to follow Islam correctly.  If the Qu'ran was complete and clear why the need for the Sunnah?  The Qu'ran mentions nothing about the Hadith being unreliable by the way, what it says is that all you need for life is the Qu'ran.  However as time progressed it became obvious that the Qu'ran did not hold all the answers and it became harder and harder for Scholars to make judgements using only the Qu'ran.  This led to the compilation of the Hadiths.  It's another one of the contradictions in the Qu'ran.  The Qu'ran isn't just a faith and philosophy like most religions are, it is also a totalitarian political regime created by Mohammed.  If you really want a better picture of both Islam and Mohammed read the Qu'ran in the correct order rather than the way it was compiled by Uthman.  It paints a very different picture.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I read it several times and there never was an instance in which I found it unclear. I really cannot think of anything that the Quran does not cover. I you could provide an example I would be grateful. And what does the order I read it in change? Contrary to many people, I didn't read the Quran in the regular order, but rather by interest. A "this surah looks interesting, I'll read it" sort off order, thing.

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What?  Which Qu'ran did you read?  It says no such thing.  In the Qu'ran it states that Adam was the first human created by God's hand and is a literal story.  If I'm not mistaken it was the original Judaic faith that state there were something like 100 generations of man before God breathed conciousness into him creating Adam.  Again tho this version of the creation myth has major holes in it.  You are right however, there are Muslims that don't believe the Adam and Eve story is literal.  I think that's one of the Sufi beliefs.  However, believing in evolution or that Adam and Eve weren't literally created by God usually gets you referred to as a Murtad/Apostate/Kufr by mainstream Islamic sects.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->



Spoiler: #1



“And certainly We created you, THEN We fashioned you, THEN We said to the angels: Make obeisance to Adam. So they did obeisance except Iblis; he was not of those who did obeisance.”

The particle “Thumma” which means “Then” and which divides the timeline between these three events is indicative of the fact that mankind’s creation was prior to Adam, as is the past tense form “Khalaqnakum” ‘We created you all’ and ‘Sawarnakum’ ‘We shaped you all’. As it is after creation of mankind and after giving it shapes that Adam comes on the scene and not before, therefore it is wrong to conclude that Adam is the first human being.





Spoiler: #2



“What ails you, that you look not for majesty in God, seeing HE CREATED YOU BY STAGES?”

Human creation is not instantaneous like Adam and Eve of the Old Testament but in stages, as per Qur’an.





Spoiler: #3



“And Allah has made you GROW OUT OF THE EARTH AS A GROWTH:”

The above further lends support to the view of stages of creation of humanity and negates the view of an instant creation of man and woman in the garden of Eden.

The above and more verses demonstrate that the Qur’an does not forward the view that mankind came about through Adam and Eve and dictates its own terms on the concept of human creation.


----------



## Jakob95 (May 29, 2011)

Pyrmon what you just wrote is from the point of an arab, that is probably as much against israel and spreading crap just to get people like you to believe them.  Them there are the people who say that the holocaust never happen, that is like saying black people were never slaves.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 29, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Pyrmon what you just wrote is from the point of an arab, that is probably as much against israel and spreading crap just to get people like you to believe them.  Them there are the people who say that the holocaust never happen, that is like saying black people were never slaves.


This post is a prime example of blind faith.

From my POV, both groups are equally as responsible for whatever the fuck is happening.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 29, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Pyrmon what you just wrote is from the point of an arab, that is probably as much against israel and spreading crap just to get people like you to believe them.  Them there are the people who say that the holocaust never happen, that is like saying black people were never slaves.


I'm not against Israel per say, I even agree that there should be a Jewish state to fight antisemitism. But I do not agree with what Israel did. And you shouldn't either. Both sides did things they probably shouldn't have done, but Palestine has the excuse of being the one that was invaded. And that is not the point of view of an Arab, but mine. I only trust facts and facts show that Israel played a big part in the current conflict. You cannot deny it.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 29, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I don't even know what are you talking about,Palestine-Israel conflict????Could you please explain it to me?


----------



## Pyrmon (May 29, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You don't know about the 60-year old, middle-eastern conflict involving Israel and Palestine?


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 29, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No! I never heard of it.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 29, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, here's the Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80...tinian_conflict
It's a little long though.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 29, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanx!


----------



## Jakob95 (May 29, 2011)

They wouldn't just kick out random arabs out of the country. They only kicked out the ones that e were a threat and were valiant.  Hell you won't understand since you never lived in struggle.  My family even had to leave uzbekistan because of the muslims and the government denied high jobs, we even had to wear the stuff that muslims were so people thought we were muslim.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 29, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> They wouldn't just kick out random arabs out of the country. They only kicked out the ones that e were a threat and were valiant.  Hell you won't understand since you never lived in struggle.  My family even had to leave uzbekistan because of the muslims and the government denied high jobs, we even had to wear the stuff that muslims were so people thought we were muslim.


Like I explained, both sides did things they shouldn't have done. You need to accept that Israel(UN, US and EU too) is partly at fault. 
Again, it wasn't the  Muslims who caused trouble, but the Arabs. Not all Arabs are Muslim and vice-versa .


----------



## Jakob95 (May 30, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I find them all the same...


----------



## Slyakin (May 30, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Holy. Shit. That is probably the most racist thing I have ever heard from you. That has got to be the saddest post ever.

Do you REALLY think that all whites are Christian? That all Israelis are Jewish? That all athiests are... something? You, my friend, are horribly uneducated.


----------



## Inazuma Eleven (May 30, 2011)

no one can predict wat will happen


----------



## Westside (May 30, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> They wouldn't just kick out random arabs out of the country. They only kicked out the ones that e were a threat and were valiant.  Hell you won't understand since you never lived in struggle.  My family even had to leave uzbekistan because of the muslims and the government denied high jobs, we even had to wear the stuff that muslims were so people thought we were muslim.


That's a pile of bullshit.  In Uzbekistan, rarely does a woman wear hijab, anyone wears casual clothing.  What city were you from?  I'm from Tashkent.  Please don't even talk about struggle, the Russians robbed us of our language that was written in Ottoman script and changed it to Cyrillic, prosecuted Muslims during the communist era and send people like my grandfather to the Soviet Army where they had no business of being there.  To this day Karimov (our president) frowns upon Islam and infact put many innocent Muslims into prison accusing them of being terrorists.  I highly doubt what you are saying is true, unless you are not from the big cities like Tashkent, Samarqand, Bukhara, Shahrisabz, Uchquduq or Andijon.  Even then, it is extremely unlikely that pure Russians or other non Islamic people live outside cities.

Just so everyone knows, Uzbekistan is a secular nation, our state law works independently of religion.

I'm tired of Islamophobia.  People like you need to see the truth.
[youtube]JpzFYeC3-ZM[/youtube]


----------



## Jakob95 (May 30, 2011)

Westside said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Was talking about before ussr.  and russia put the country in its feet.  Without russia the country would be crap. Russia basically built tashkent.  Compare tashkent to cities like bukhara and you will see the difference.  Russia have you guys good education.  How the hell is samarkand, and bukhara huge cities.. Keeshlak.  Plus the Russians put them in there place from turning into a country b like afghanistan.


----------



## Westside (May 30, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Westside said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Those cities are bigger than the rest.  Plus, you don't have any clue how our people are.  We are Turkic based people, if you look at all Turkic countries they are all secular.  Turkey itself is in NATO infact.  We didn't need USSR.  Why are you complaining when Russians invading our land and then you are complaining about how we treated you?  Our culture was robbed, a lot of our vocabulary is Russian.  Some young kids don't even speak Uzbek anymore.  Prosperity is not always just in economy my friend.  Our people rather die free.
Also don't judge a group of people like that again please, I read your previous post about Arabs and was applauded by your ignorance.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 30, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 27 2011, 07:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 27 2011, 07:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3668367:date=May 27 2011, 01:06 AM:name=pyrmon24)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pyrmon24 @ May 27 2011, 01:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668367"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It isn't gender inequality. The second women is mostly there as backup for the first on. She only has something to do/say IF the first woman makes a mistake or doesn't know what to say. This is explained by the fact that, until very very recently, women didn't have a role AT ALL in anything that had to do with finances, even concerning themselves! Hell, until the 1960s, Canadian women couldn't buy a car without the signature of their husband. In such societies, of course a women can forget this or that about financial stuff. Now things are slightly different, but not that much. In an Islamic nation, men are expected of paying the bills. A woman shouldn't have to go to work to feed a husband who does nothing. That does not mean women are forbidden from working or taking place in financial or political matters or of making decisions as to how a family's money should be spent. Sorry for not being clearer before, but it was late.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again, it is gender inequality.  What it's saying is that women are mentally deficient enough that there is a high chance that they won't remember all the details, will get nervous and not know what to say and that they need another woman there to "help" them.  And by omitting the same rule for men it's saying that men never suffer from this problem.  Therefore implying that men are mentally and intellectually superior to women.  There are men who would suffer exactly the same problems that women would suffer under the same circumstances, so why not the need for a backup male as well?  However you try to explain this away it will always be gender inequality as gender inequality is defined.  The whole notion of the 1 man = 2 woman witness in the Sharia is sexist and prejudicial.

And going on about the other things only distracts from the original point and in no way offers proof that women are mentally deficient to the point where they need backup to give witness.  All that does is show that as a society we were mistaken in our attitude towards women.  Luckily our societies are fluid and morphous.  Nothing is set in stone and with effort and understanding it can be changed and corrected.  However this isn't the case with an Islamic society as what's in the Qu'ran now is what was and what will always be in the Qu'ran.  The Islamic ideology and belief system is set in stone and as it's the "immutable word of God" can not be questioned, judged or corrected.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The reason is mostly biological. In Islam, marrying means, hopefully, starting a family. The very point of marriage is an union between two(or more) people that are in love to make children, ultimate fruit of that love. A woman only being able to be pregnant from on man at a time, having several husbands would be simply pointless. But a man having several wives can get a child from every one of them at the same time. But, again, marrying a second wife requires that your first wife is ok with it and means you must treat them equally, not proffering one over another. Call it inequality if you want, I think it makes sense.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

For most cultures and societies marrying means starting a family, it's not exclusive to Islam.  I totally agree that marriage is a union between two people that are in love.  However as far as I'm concerned THAT is the fruit of their love.  Having children is a bonus.  What you're basically saying is that 2 people who marry but can't conceive shouldn't actually be considered married because the whole point of being married is to have children.  The whole point of being married is to show that you love and care for the person you're marrying so much that you want to be considered a union.  Marriage stopped being a purely religious ceremony decades ago, or in most modern nations it has anyway.


I totally agree that women can only have one child at a time.  However it wouldn't stop a woman with 2 husbands having a child from each of them.  All it would mean is that the numbers wouldn't increase at a rapid rate ie.  Instead of 4 children born a year it would be 1.  So theoretically it wouldn't be pointless because each Man would still be able to have a child or children with the woman he loves.  There would still be a solid loving family unit.  And unless I'm mistaken that's the whole point of marriage.  The only reason to prefer a man with many wives over a woman with many husbands would be because the number of births would be higher.  In an already over-populated world wouldn't lower birthrates be a better thing than a rapidly increasing population?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Read above.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again, there are plenty of women who could more than equitable between all of her husbands.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Islam teaches that men must care for women. This does not remove them of any right, only that men should be gallant towards women and be the ones to pay. In an Islamic world, men have more financial responsibility(in a marriage). Besides, the half of a man's share thing is really a bare minimum. The deceased can give how much he wants to whomever he wants, but he needs to give these minimum shares.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

At the time Mohammed wrote (or dictated if you want to get semantic) the Qu'ran that's how society was.  However as I've stated before society has moved on from these times.  Society is now at a point where women are more than capable of caring for themselves.  The whole hunter/gatherer idea of the Male is long gone in modern society.  Life in this day age is completely unrecognisable compared to life back then.  In this day and age women play an equal role with regards to supporting themselves and their families.  I should introduce you to my sister.  She looks after her two children, her terminally ill husband, helps out in the local community, helps my parents and much much more.  There is no such thing as a gender specific role with regards to the family unit any more, society has progressed.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The verses that are linked to the Hijab don't really talk about the Hijab and only a bad interpretation leads to the Hijab. I read them, they don't talk about head coverings.[/b] Unless you feel like reading those verses and deciding for yourself whether they mention the Hijab, you'll have to take my word for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've read the verses.  When it comes to religion I rarely take anyones word for anything.  I've actually read the Qu'ran several times.  I haven't had a chance to read all the Hadiths yet, but that's an awful lot of material to work through obviously.  Here is one of the verses regarding women's "modesty" and the one most commonly used to support the need for both the Hijab and the Burkha.



Spoiler



“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31)



<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It says that women should not display their beauty and ornaments (ornaments meaning jewellery) except what must ordinarily appear and that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to family members.  As the hair is not something that must ordinarily appear in order to carry on with day to day life then it's saying that it must be covered.  However, you don't have to take my word for it.  Feel free to have a read through the many many many things that Islamic scholars have written on the subject.  All Islamic scholars from the Sunni and Shi'ite sects agree that it means the Hijab is a necessary part of the female uniform for Islamic women.  Salafi/Wahabbi belief goes further obviously stating that the word veil does indeed refer to a face covering and therefore the Niqab (most people mistake the Niqab for the Burkha in western society) is what women should be wearing.  If you read further on in the Qu'ran it states that the Burkha is necessary for Mohammeds wives as they should be completely shielded from the eyes of anyone but Mohammed.  Like I say tho, you don't have to take my word for it - there is plenty of scholarly evidence for these things.  And as most really devout Muslims say, the average person can not understand or interpret the Qu'ran - you must consult educated scholars for these things and not draw your own conclusions.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Never read an Hadith in my life(some quotes from some, but never actual reading) and the Qur'an was completely clear to me. And it's not because a large number think the Hadith are to be used to build the Sharia that they necessarily should. I even remember the Qur'an stating something about the Hadiths not being reliable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Qu'ran is far from completely clear.  That's why the Sunnah is necessary and it's also why the Hadith were compiled.  I never said that I thought that the Sharia should be built using the Hadith, Islamic scholars themselves state this.  Even Mohammed himself admitted that you need the Sunnah along with the Qu'ran in order to follow Islam correctly.  If the Qu'ran was complete and clear why the need for the Sunnah?  The Qu'ran mentions nothing about the Hadith being unreliable by the way, what it says is that all you need for life is the Qu'ran.  However as time progressed it became obvious that the Qu'ran did not hold all the answers and it became harder and harder for Scholars to make judgements using only the Qu'ran.  This led to the compilation of the Hadiths.  It's another one of the contradictions in the Qu'ran.  The Qu'ran isn't just a faith and philosophy like most religions are, it is also a totalitarian political regime created by Mohammed.  If you really want a better picture of both Islam and Mohammed read the Qu'ran in the correct order rather than the way it was compiled by Uthman.  It paints a very different picture.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Abrahamic religions usually include Judaism, Christianity and Islam. At least, that's what the general definition is. Don't know enough about Mohammad to answer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That all depends on how you look at it.  Most religious studies include the Book of Mormon as part of the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths lineage.  It all depends on what faith you are looking at it from.  I ask the question because if you include Islam as an official part of the Abrahamic faith it becomes even easier to disprove the god it promotes.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No, and I do remember seeing something in the Qur'an saying that Adam wasn't the first man but the first man to be evolved enough to receive knowledge by God. And something about evolution too. So I would expect at least some Muslims don't believe that either.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What?  Which Qu'ran did you read?  It says no such thing.  In the Qu'ran it states that Adam was the first human created by God's hand and is a literal story.  If I'm not mistaken it was the original Judaic faith that state there were something like 100 generations of man before God breathed conciousness into him creating Adam.  Again tho this version of the creation myth has major holes in it.  You are right however, there are Muslims that don't believe the Adam and Eve story is literal.  I think that's one of the Sufi beliefs.  However, believing in evolution or that Adam and Eve weren't literally created by God usually gets you referred to as a Murtad/Apostate/Kufr by mainstream Islamic sects.

So here's one simple proof that the Abrahamic god can't actually exist, this one is using Islam as an example.  According to the Qu'ran the stars are used to beautify the heavens and are an adornment from God.  These are contained in the lower heavens and the Moon is in their midst.



Spoiler



"He Who created the seven heavens, one above the other ... 
And We have adorned the lowest heaven with lamps ... (67:3,5)"

"Do you not see how God has created the seven heavens 
one above the other, 
and made the moon a light in their midst, 
and made the sun as a lamp? (71:15-16)"



Now, how close is the moon and how close is the nearest star?  Surely the creator of the universe would have known that the nearest star is light years away from us (the Sun) and that the next nearest star is nowhere near the moon.

Or how about the development of a foetus inside the mothers womb.



Spoiler



"Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; 
then of that clot We made a lump; 
then We made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh (23:14)"



Surely the creator of the universe would have known that bones don't develop before flesh inside the womb?

Now if the Abrahamic god didn't know these two simple things then surely he couldn't be the creator of universe.  It's either that or admit that Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran.  If Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran then logic dictates that the Abrahamic god doesn't exist.  There are loads more scientific errors in the Qu'ran besides these.  The reason I choose these ones is because they're the simplest and most people with the slightest education know the answers without having to do any research.

If you'd like though we can say that Mohammed was a false prophet and that Islam isn't canon in the Abrahamic faith and therefore wasn't really inspired by the Abrahamic god so therefore Islam being incorrect isn't proof that the Abrahamic god doesn't and can't exist?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<b>The origin of your point,why are there two women witnesses to a single men....are the women mentally deficient....here is the answer:


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyMfZCNahds[/youtube]


</b>

<b>Why is Polygamy allowed in Islam(It gives the answer why women don't marry more than one man):


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQaPBU5ppsk[/youtube]


</b>

<b>This is what Islam teaches about Hijab and why is it important:


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp5ORAqZIlA[/youtube]


</b>

<b>As far as Embryology is concerned.....HERE IS A PROOF OF ITS AUTHENTICITY:


Spoiler



Part 1[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLEuuLj0GCI[/youtube]  
Part 2[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pag3hKMF0pA[/youtube]


</b>

<b>Anyone who can challenge this Quranic Fact(proved by Science):


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnFhhDK2J3c&feature=related[/youtube]


</b>

I would like to know more scientific errors you know that are in the Holy Qur'an.

(I have posted this specially for TrolleyDave....so I am eagerly waiting for his reply) <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
Thanks Pyrmon24 for re-posting it.


----------



## Pyrmon (May 30, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again, it is gender inequality.  What it's saying is that women are mentally deficient enough that there is a high chance that they won't remember all the details, will get nervous and not know what to say and that they need another woman there to "help" them.  And by omitting the same rule for men it's saying that men never suffer from this problem.  Therefore implying that men are mentally and intellectually superior to women.  There are men who would suffer exactly the same problems that women would suffer under the same circumstances, so why not the need for a backup male as well?  However you try to explain this away it will always be gender inequality as gender inequality is defined.  The whole notion of the 1 man = 2 woman witness in the Sharia is sexist and prejudicial.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First of all, there are either two men or one man and two women that must be witnesses. Therefore, men also oblige by the same rule. There needs two women witnesses instead of one man witness because women, especially back then, have generally less knowledge of finances than men. Besides, the two women rule makes sense once you take the risk that one of the women could be married/or will marry the man that was a witness, therefore making her testimony biased.

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For most cultures and societies marrying means starting a family, it's not exclusive to Islam.  I totally agree that marriage is a union between two people that are in love.  However as far as I'm concerned THAT is the fruit of their love.  Having children is a bonus.  What you're basically saying is that 2 people who marry but can't conceive shouldn't actually be considered married because the whole point of being married is to have children.  The whole point of being married is to show that you love and care for the person you're marrying so much that you want to be considered a union.  Marriage stopped being a purely religious ceremony decades ago, or in most modern nations it has anyway.

I totally agree that women can only have one child at a time.  However it wouldn't stop a woman with 2 husbands having a child from each of them.  All it would mean is that the numbers wouldn't increase at a rapid rate ie.  Instead of 4 children born a year it would be 1.  So theoretically it wouldn't be pointless because each Man would still be able to have a child or children with the woman he loves.  There would still be a solid loving family unit.  And unless I'm mistaken that's the whole point of marriage.  The only reason to prefer a man with many wives over a woman with many husbands would be because the number of births would be higher.  In an already over-populated world wouldn't lower birthrates be a better thing than a rapidly increasing population?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Quran strongly discourages polygamy. Polygamy was a way of life until the Quran was revealed 1400 years ago. It was advocated and practiced by the followers of the previous scriptures. In all the scriptures, the men were allowed to have more than one wife and not vise verse, since the idea of polygamy then was to populate the earth. As we know a woman can be pregnant only once a year even if she is married to four men but one man can have four children in the process at the same time if he is married to four wives. Polygamy was never meant to be abused for sexual pleasure or prove superiority.

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->At the time Mohammed wrote (or dictated if you want to get semantic) the Qu'ran that's how society was.  However as I've stated before society has moved on from these times.  Society is now at a point where women are more than capable of caring for themselves.  The whole hunter/gatherer idea of the Male is long gone in modern society.  Life in this day age is completely unrecognisable compared to life back then.  In this day and age women play an equal role with regards to supporting themselves and their families.  I should introduce you to my sister.  She looks after her two children, her terminally ill husband, helps out in the local community, helps my parents and much much more.  There is no such thing as a gender specific role with regards to the family unit any more, society has progressed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is a common misconception even among the traditional Muslims themselves. The Quran gives the parents total freedom to give their children as much as they see fit even if this means giving the females double what the males would get. The Quran, however, commands that if a will is NOT left, then the estate is distributed in such a manner that the son gets double what the daughter gets. Generally, the son is responsible for a family, while the daughter is taken care of by a husband or her family. However, the Quran recommends in 2:180 that a will shall be left to conform with the specific circumstances of the deceased. For example, if the son is rich and the daughter is poor, one may leave a will giving the daughter everything, or twice as much as the son. 

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've read the verses.  When it comes to religion I rarely take anyones word for anything.  I've actually read the Qu'ran several times.  I haven't had a chance to read all the Hadiths yet, but that's an awful lot of material to work through obviously.  Here is one of the verses regarding women's "modesty" and the one most commonly used to support the need for both the Hijab and the Burkha.

It says that women should not display their beauty and ornaments (ornaments meaning jewellery) except what must ordinarily appear and that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to family members.  As the hair is not something that must ordinarily appear in order to carry on with day to day life then it's saying that it must be covered.  However, you don't have to take my word for it.  Feel free to have a read through the many many many things that Islamic scholars have written on the subject.  All Islamic scholars from the Sunni and Shi'ite sects agree that it means the Hijab is a necessary part of the female uniform for Islamic women.  Salafi/Wahabbi belief goes further obviously stating that the word veil does indeed refer to a face covering and therefore the Niqab (most people mistake the Niqab for the Burkha in western society) is what women should be wearing.  If you read further on in the Qu'ran it states that the Burkha is necessary for Mohammeds wives as they should be completely shielded from the eyes of anyone but Mohammed.  Like I say tho, you don't have to take my word for it - there is plenty of scholarly evidence for these things.  And as most really devout Muslims say, the average person can not understand or interpret the Qu'ran - you must consult educated scholars for these things and not draw your own conclusions.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Here is the verse you posted with an addition:


Spoiler



“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils(arabic word is khumur) over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31)



The noun khimar (of which khumur is plural) denotes the head-covering customarily used by Arabian women as an ornament (not as hijab to cover their head) before and after the advent of Islam. According to most of the classical commentators, it was worn in pre-Islamic times more or less as an ornament and was let down loosely over the wearer's back; and since, in accordance with the fashion prevalent at the time, the upper part of a woman's tunic had a wide opening in the front, her chest was left bare. Hence, the injunction to cover the bosom by means of a khimar (a term so familiar to the contemporaries of the Prophet) does not necessarily relate to the use of a khimar as such but is, rather, meant to make it clear that a woman's chest is not included in the concept of "what may decently be apparent" of her body and should not, therefore, be displayed. Covering of the head, therefore is not a requirement.

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran is far from completely clear.  That's why the Sunnah is necessary and it's also why the Hadith were compiled.  I never said that I thought that the Sharia should be built using the Hadith, Islamic scholars themselves state this.  Even Mohammed himself admitted that you need the Sunnah along with the Qu'ran in order to follow Islam correctly.  If the Qu'ran was complete and clear why the need for the Sunnah?  The Qu'ran mentions nothing about the Hadith being unreliable by the way, what it says is that all you need for life is the Qu'ran.  However as time progressed it became obvious that the Qu'ran did not hold all the answers and it became harder and harder for Scholars to make judgements using only the Qu'ran.  This led to the compilation of the Hadiths.  It's another one of the contradictions in the Qu'ran.  The Qu'ran isn't just a faith and philosophy like most religions are, it is also a totalitarian political regime created by Mohammed.  If you really want a better picture of both Islam and Mohammed read the Qu'ran in the correct order rather than the way it was compiled by Uthman.  It paints a very different picture.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I read it several times and there never was an instance in which I found it unclear. I really cannot think of anything that the Quran does not cover. I you could provide an example I would be grateful. And what does the order I read it in change? Contrary to many people, I didn't read the Quran in the regular order, but rather by interest. A "this surah looks interesting, I'll read it" sort off order, thing.

<!--quoteo(post=3668611:date=May 26 2011, 10:20 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 26 2011, 10:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3668611"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What?  Which Qu'ran did you read?  It says no such thing.  In the Qu'ran it states that Adam was the first human created by God's hand and is a literal story.  If I'm not mistaken it was the original Judaic faith that state there were something like 100 generations of man before God breathed conciousness into him creating Adam.  Again tho this version of the creation myth has major holes in it.  You are right however, there are Muslims that don't believe the Adam and Eve story is literal.  I think that's one of the Sufi beliefs.  However, believing in evolution or that Adam and Eve weren't literally created by God usually gets you referred to as a Murtad/Apostate/Kufr by mainstream Islamic sects.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->



Spoiler: #1



“And certainly We created you, THEN We fashioned you, THEN We said to the angels: Make obeisance to Adam. So they did obeisance except Iblis; he was not of those who did obeisance.”

The particle “Thumma” which means “Then” and which divides the timeline between these three events is indicative of the fact that mankind’s creation was prior to Adam, as is the past tense form “Khalaqnakum” ‘We created you all’ and ‘Sawarnakum’ ‘We shaped you all’. As it is after creation of mankind and after giving it shapes that Adam comes on the scene and not before, therefore it is wrong to conclude that Adam is the first human being.





Spoiler: #2



“What ails you, that you look not for majesty in God, seeing HE CREATED YOU BY STAGES?”

Human creation is not instantaneous like Adam and Eve of the Old Testament but in stages, as per Qur’an.





Spoiler: #3



“And Allah has made you GROW OUT OF THE EARTH AS A GROWTH:”

The above further lends support to the view of stages of creation of humanity and negates the view of an instant creation of man and woman in the garden of Eden.

The above and more verses demonstrate that the Qur’an does not forward the view that mankind came about through Adam and Eve and dictates its own terms on the concept of human creation.




I'll re-post for TrolleyDave too then.


----------



## Jakob95 (May 30, 2011)

Westside said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Out of no were I got lots of uzbeks in my school most don't even know russian.  but yeah I guess your right during the soviet times.  My mom only speaks in russian, dad speaks in russian, tajik, he forgot uzbek already.and I can only speak in russian.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 30, 2011)

Westside said:
			
		

> Also don't judge a group of people like that again please, I read your previous post about Arabs and was applauded by your ignorance.


This. Absolutely this.


----------



## ShinyJellicent12 (May 30, 2011)

RockmanForte said:
			
		

> helloworld12321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't read the bible. I am Hindu. And I don't know anything about Noah, the ARK. Sorry :|


----------



## Jakob95 (May 30, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> Westside said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lol I was just joking about that.  Its not like I am saying they are all the same.  I said they are to me.  Different definition right there.


----------



## TrolleyDave (May 31, 2011)

First off apologies to both of you.  We had family friends staying for the weekend so by the time I had free time I was too tired to give your posts the attention they deserved.

Reply for bsfmtl123 :

<!--quoteo(post=3674907:date=May 30 2011, 10:10 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ May 30 2011, 10:10 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3674907"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>The origin of your point,why are there two women witnesses to a single men....are the women mentally deficient....here is the answer:


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyMfZCNahds[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

As soon as you said you were going to post videos I knew the exact Zakir Naik videos you were going to use.  This is all well and good but what none of this does is take into account Mohammeds own feelings about women.  Shall I pull out the various Hadiths that show he thought of women less than favourably?  Both you and I know they are there so we'll save a little bit of back and forth.  In actuality Mohammed saw 2 womens testimony as being equal to one mans, it's as simple as that.  But that's still getting off the point.  In the case of this verse it's commonly seen as 2 males being separate independent witnesses.  In the case where 2 men cannot be found then it should be 1 man acting as one independent witness and 2 women acting as another independent witness (to make sure their stories correlate).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Why is Polygamy allowed in Islam(It gives the answer why women don't marry more than one man):


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQaPBU5ppsk[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

One of the rare few Zakir Naik videos that I haven't actually seen. lol  I already know why polygamy is allowed in Islam.  I've read the explanations, watched videos from other scholars.  That's still not that point.  In Islam is a woman allowed to marry more than one man if she so chooses?  The answer is no.  So even if it's rationalised it's still a sign of inequality.  It is something the man is permitted to do that the woman isn't.  And a little suggestion for you.  You should check up on the facts that Zakir Naik likes to use in his speeches, not all of them are always correct.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>This is what Islam teaches about Hijab and why is it important:


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp5ORAqZIlA[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I already know the explanation for why the Hijab is important in Islam, again I've watched and read all the information for all the various places.  But like I said above, rationalising still doesn't stop it being inequal treatment.  Does a man have to cover himself from head to toe leaving only the face and hands showing?  The answer is no.  Offering all the reasons and all the explanations in the world won't stop it being an inequal rule.

Shall I tell you what the real problem here is.  The real problem is the words inequal and inequality.  In modern times those words have taken on a negative connotation.  So whenever someone hears the word they instantly assume it to mean that someone is criticising something.  Islam teaches you that it's perfect, which means there can be no faults.  So because of the fact that the words inequal and inequality have taken on a negative meaning then that means using that word when referencing Islam means it might not be perfect, therefore you feel as though someone is attacking it.  You should take the words at face value, without any sort of emotion attached to.  Once you do that you'll be admit that yes, there is inequality in Islam.  It might have it's justifications and excuses for them, but there are still aspects of it that favour the man, there are aspects that favour the woman - Islam is not perfectly equal between the sexes.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>As far as Embryology is concerned.....HERE IS A PROOF OF ITS AUTHENTICITY:


Spoiler



Part 1[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLEuuLj0GCI[/youtube]  
Part 2[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pag3hKMF0pA[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've seen those videos before.  You should check up on some of the things he says, you might be surprised to find out that he's not told you the entire truth.  However, at no point in the video does he explain the stage of embryo development where the foetus is purely skeletal.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Anyone who can challenge this Quranic Fact(proved by Science):


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnFhhDK2J3c&feature=related[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, but where in that video does it show where all the stars are that are supposed to be surrounding our Moon?  There is one star in our solar system, so it is no more surrounded than we are.  And how do you know that Mohammed didn't steal that expansion theory from someone else.  There could have been others promoting that idea back then it's just their words were never scribed.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I would like to know more scientific errors you know that are in the Holy Qur'an.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

We'll move on to those after we've cleared up the first two.  Don't think that just because you were convinced by a video that I would be too.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->(I have posted this specially for TrolleyDave....so I am eagerly waiting for his reply) <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
Thanks Pyrmon24 for re-posting it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

My apologies, but as I explained above I had family friends staying.

Reply for pyrmon24 :

<!--quoteo(post=3675048:date=May 30 2011, 12:33 PM:name=pyrmon24)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pyrmon24 @ May 30 2011, 12:33 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3675048"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->First of all, there are either two men or one man and two women that must be witnesses. Therefore, men also oblige by the same rule. There needs two women witnesses instead of one man witness because women, especially back then, have generally less knowledge of finances than men. Besides, the two women rule makes sense once you take the risk that one of the women could be married/or will marry the man that was a witness, therefore making her testimony biased.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That sounds reasonable and good.  However Mohammed himself stated that two female witnesses are equal to one male because of the deficiency of the womans mind.



Spoiler



Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, "Isn't the witness of a women equal to half that of a man?" The women said "yes". He said "This is because of the deficiency of the women's mind." - Sahih Bukhari 3:48:826



That's from a Hadith book considered to be quite solid and referenced alot.  However you try to spin this as to make it look noble and equal, it's not.  I know you're going to say "but the Hadith isn't necessary in Islam" but yes, I'm afraid it is.  It's necessary because mainstream Islam denotes it's necessary.  It's something both the Sunni and Shi'a Muslims agree upon, they just have problems agreeing on which ones (along with many other things).  So that is the reason that there are two female witnesses instead of one man.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Quran strongly discourages polygamy. Polygamy was a way of life until the Quran was revealed 1400 years ago. It was advocated and practiced by the followers of the previous scriptures. In all the scriptures, the men were allowed to have more than one wife and not vise verse, since the idea of polygamy then was to populate the earth. As we know a woman can be pregnant only once a year even if she is married to four men but one man can have four children in the process at the same time if he is married to four wives. Polygamy was never meant to be abused for sexual pleasure or prove superiority.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, but is the opposite allowed to happen?  The answer is no.  So therefore it is inequal treatment.  Also, When did I ever say it was used for sexual pleasure or to prove superiority.  What I said was that it was an example of inequal treatment towards a woman.  To say it's not is redefining the word inequal.  Islam does not treat the sexes perfectly equal, to say any different is denying a fact.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is a common misconception even among the traditional Muslims themselves. The Quran gives the parents total freedom to give their children as much as they see fit even if this means giving the females double what the males would get. The Quran, however, commands that if a will is NOT left, then the estate is distributed in such a manner that the son gets double what the daughter gets. Generally, the son is responsible for a family, while the daughter is taken care of by a husband or her family. However, the Quran recommends in 2:180 that a will shall be left to conform with the specific circumstances of the deceased. For example, if the son is rich and the daughter is poor, one may leave a will giving the daughter everything, or twice as much as the son.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Again you're defending an accusation that wasn't even made.  I said that this rule was a case of inequality.  Nothing more nothing less.  It is not perfectly equal.  You cannot say that Islam treats women perfectly equal, because it does not.  It may have it's reasons and it's excuses but that still does not stop it from having inequalities.  You cannot say that it's perfectly equal any more than you can say any other system is perfectly equal.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Here is the verse you posted with an addition:


Spoiler



“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils(arabic word is khumur) over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31)



The noun khimar (of which khumur is plural) denotes the head-covering customarily used by Arabian women as an ornament (not as hijab to cover their head) before and after the advent of Islam. According to most of the classical commentators, it was worn in pre-Islamic times more or less as an ornament and was let down loosely over the wearer's back; and since, in accordance with the fashion prevalent at the time, the upper part of a woman's tunic had a wide opening in the front, her chest was left bare. Hence, the injunction to cover the bosom by means of a khimar (a term so familiar to the contemporaries of the Prophet) does not necessarily relate to the use of a khimar as such but is, rather, meant to make it clear that a woman's chest is not included in the concept of "what may decently be apparent" of her body and should not, therefore, be displayed. Covering of the head, therefore is not a requirement.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yep, I've read all that.  Sounds really good doesn't it.  But that's not actually Islam.  That's a modern interpretation that goes against what Mohammed and his companions taught.  There are many many westernised and modern Muslim women who do not wear the Hijab, and I agree that that verse can justify it, however it is not Islamic jurisprudence nor is it what Mohammed taught was the meaning of the verse.  Mohammed said women of menstrual age should cover all but their face and their hands.  Are you going to say that Mohammed didn't know best about Islam?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I read it several times and there never was an instance in which I found it unclear. I really cannot think of anything that the Quran does not cover. I you could provide an example I would be grateful. And what does the order I read it in change? Contrary to many people, I didn't read the Quran in the regular order, but rather by interest. A "this surah looks interesting, I'll read it" sort off order, thing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've just pointed out several instances where it was obviously unclear to you as you took the wrong meanings from them.  What does the order you read it in change what it says?  Well it puts everything in context for a start, so you can see where one verse is referring to another that was recently said.  It also shows you how Mohammeds preaching changed from peaceful and accepting to violent and conquering.  It also helps you find the abrogated verses easier.  And it helps point out some of the dodgy things that Mohammed said that help to show that he was making it up as he went along.  Rather than dipping and diving into the Qu'ran because some things look interesting read the whole thing.  Once in Uthman order and once in written order.  It'll help paint a clearer picture of some of the verses.  And I'd also recommend reading more than just the sites that push Islam in a positive way in order to help combat Islamophobia and help it feel more palatable to Westerners.  Read the proper Islam.  Most modern Westernised Muslims don't follow the same kind of Islam that they do in the Middle East, they're far more liberal.  Although in the UK there seems to be a growth in the numbers that want to return to the more conservative Islam.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler: #1



“And certainly We created you, THEN We fashioned you, THEN We said to the angels: Make obeisance to Adam. So they did obeisance except Iblis; he was not of those who did obeisance.”

The particle “Thumma” which means “Then” and which divides the timeline between these three events is indicative of the fact that mankind’s creation was prior to Adam, as is the past tense form “Khalaqnakum” ‘We created you all’ and ‘Sawarnakum’ ‘We shaped you all’. As it is after creation of mankind and after giving it shapes that Adam comes on the scene and not before, therefore it is wrong to conclude that Adam is the first human being.





Spoiler: #2



“What ails you, that you look not for majesty in God, seeing HE CREATED YOU BY STAGES?”

Human creation is not instantaneous like Adam and Eve of the Old Testament but in stages, as per Qur’an.





Spoiler: #3



“And Allah has made you GROW OUT OF THE EARTH AS A GROWTH:”

The above further lends support to the view of stages of creation of humanity and negates the view of an instant creation of man and woman in the garden of Eden.

The above and more verses demonstrate that the Qur’an does not forward the view that mankind came about through Adam and Eve and dictates its own terms on the concept of human creation.


ost for TrolleyDave too then.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And the survey says... "Incorrect".  As lots of people like to say to critics of Islam, that's completely out of context.  You can take a verse or line out of a huge amount of books and use it to prove things that they had no knowledge or make it seem like it supports things it does not.  I can take lines out of the Qu'ran that shows that Apostates are the ones that God guides and Muslims are abandoned by him.

Read this, it'll tell you all about what the stages of Mankinds development was.  The "grow out of the earth as a growth" thing is also misquoted in order to attach a scientific fact to it.

edit : Oops, forgot the link! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> <a href="http://www.searchtruth.com/tafsir/Quran/7/index.html#sdfootnote10sym" target="_blank">http://www.searchtruth.com/tafsir/Quran/7/...sdfootnote10sym</a>

And again, apologies for the delay in the reply.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (May 31, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3676210:date=May 31 2011, 04:43 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ May 31 2011, 04:43 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3676210"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->First off apologies to both of you.  We had family friends staying for the weekend so by the time I had free time I was too tired to give your posts the attention they deserved.

Reply for bsfmtl123 :

<!--quoteo(post=3674907:date=May 30 2011, 10:10 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ May 30 2011, 10:10 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3674907"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>The origin of your point,why are there two women witnesses to a single men....are the women mentally deficient....here is the answer:


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyMfZCNahds[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

As soon as you said you were going to post videos I knew the exact Zakir Naik videos you were going to use.  This is all well and good but what none of this does is take into account Mohammeds own feelings about women.  Shall I pull out the various Hadiths that show he thought of women less than favourably?  Both you and I know they are there so we'll save a little bit of back and forth.  In actuality Mohammed saw 2 womens testimony as being equal to one mans, it's as simple as that.  But that's still getting off the point.  In the case of this verse it's commonly seen as 2 males being separate independent witnesses.  In the case where 2 men cannot be found then it should be 1 man acting as one independent witness and 2 women acting as another independent witness (to make sure their stories correlate).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Why is Polygamy allowed in Islam(It gives the answer why women don't marry more than one man):


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQaPBU5ppsk[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

One of the rare few Zakir Naik videos that I haven't actually seen. lol  I already know why polygamy is allowed in Islam.  I've read the explanations, watched videos from other scholars.  That's still not that point.  In Islam is a woman allowed to marry more than one man if she so chooses?  The answer is no.  So even if it's rationalised it's still a sign of inequality.  It is something the man is permitted to do that the woman isn't.  And a little suggestion for you.  You should check up on the facts that Zakir Naik likes to use in his speeches, not all of them are always correct.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>This is what Islam teaches about Hijab and why is it important:


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp5ORAqZIlA[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I already know the explanation for why the Hijab is important in Islam, again I've watched and read all the information for all the various places.  But like I said above, rationalising still doesn't stop it being inequal treatment.  Does a man have to cover himself from head to toe leaving only the face and hands showing?  The answer is no.  Offering all the reasons and all the explanations in the world won't stop it being an inequal rule.

Shall I tell you what the real problem here is.  The real problem is the words inequal and inequality.  In modern times those words have taken on a negative connotation.  So whenever someone hears the word they instantly assume it to mean that someone is criticising something.  Islam teaches you that it's perfect, which means there can be no faults.  So because of the fact that the words inequal and inequality have taken on a negative meaning then that means using that word when referencing Islam means it might not be perfect, therefore you feel as though someone is attacking it.  You should take the words at face value, without any sort of emotion attached to.  Once you do that you'll be admit that yes, there is inequality in Islam.  It might have it's justifications and excuses for them, but there are still aspects of it that favour the man, there are aspects that favour the woman - Islam is not perfectly equal between the sexes.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>As far as Embryology is concerned.....HERE IS A PROOF OF ITS AUTHENTICITY:


Spoiler



Part 1[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLEuuLj0GCI[/youtube]  
Part 2[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pag3hKMF0pA[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've seen those videos before.  You should check up on some of the things he says, you might be surprised to find out that he's not told you the entire truth.  However, at no point in the video does he explain the stage of embryo development where the foetus is purely skeletal.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Anyone who can challenge this Quranic Fact(proved by Science):


Spoiler



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnFhhDK2J3c&feature=related[/youtube]


</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, but where in that video does it show where all the stars are that are supposed to be surrounding our Moon?  There is one star in our solar system, so it is no more surrounded than we are.  And how do you know that Mohammed didn't steal that expansion theory from someone else.  There could have been others promoting that idea back then it's just their words were never scribed.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I would like to know more scientific errors you know that are in the Holy Qur'an.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

We'll move on to those after we've cleared up the first two.  Don't think that just because you were convinced by a video that I would be too.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->(I have posted this specially for TrolleyDave....so I am eagerly waiting for his reply) <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
Thanks Pyrmon24 for re-posting it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

My apologies, but as I explained above I had family friends staying.

Reply for pyrmon24 :

<!--quoteo(post=3675048:date=May 30 2011, 12:33 PM:name=pyrmon24)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pyrmon24 @ May 30 2011, 12:33 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3675048"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->First of all, there are either two men or one man and two women that must be witnesses. Therefore, men also oblige by the same rule. There needs two women witnesses instead of one man witness because women, especially back then, have generally less knowledge of finances than men. Besides, the two women rule makes sense once you take the risk that one of the women could be married/or will marry the man that was a witness, therefore making her testimony biased.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That sounds reasonable and good.  However Mohammed himself stated that two female witnesses are equal to one male because of the deficiency of the womans mind.



Spoiler



Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, "Isn't the witness of a women equal to half that of a man?" The women said "yes". He said "This is because of the deficiency of the women's mind." - Sahih Bukhari 3:48:826



That's from a Hadith book considered to be quite solid and referenced alot.  However you try to spin this as to make it look noble and equal, it's not.  I know you're going to say "but the Hadith isn't necessary in Islam" but yes, I'm afraid it is.  It's necessary because mainstream Islam denotes it's necessary.  It's something both the Sunni and Shi'a Muslims agree upon, they just have problems agreeing on which ones (along with many other things).  So that is the reason that there are two female witnesses instead of one man.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Quran strongly discourages polygamy. Polygamy was a way of life until the Quran was revealed 1400 years ago. It was advocated and practiced by the followers of the previous scriptures. In all the scriptures, the men were allowed to have more than one wife and not vise verse, since the idea of polygamy then was to populate the earth. As we know a woman can be pregnant only once a year even if she is married to four men but one man can have four children in the process at the same time if he is married to four wives. Polygamy was never meant to be abused for sexual pleasure or prove superiority.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, but is the opposite allowed to happen?  The answer is no.  So therefore it is inequal treatment.  Also, When did I ever say it was used for sexual pleasure or to prove superiority.  What I said was that it was an example of inequal treatment towards a woman.  To say it's not is redefining the word inequal.  Islam does not treat the sexes perfectly equal, to say any different is denying a fact.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is a common misconception even among the traditional Muslims themselves. The Quran gives the parents total freedom to give their children as much as they see fit even if this means giving the females double what the males would get. The Quran, however, commands that if a will is NOT left, then the estate is distributed in such a manner that the son gets double what the daughter gets. Generally, the son is responsible for a family, while the daughter is taken care of by a husband or her family. However, the Quran recommends in 2:180 that a will shall be left to conform with the specific circumstances of the deceased. For example, if the son is rich and the daughter is poor, one may leave a will giving the daughter everything, or twice as much as the son.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Again you're defending an accusation that wasn't even made.  I said that this rule was a case of inequality.  Nothing more nothing less.  It is not perfectly equal.  You cannot say that Islam treats women perfectly equal, because it does not.  It may have it's reasons and it's excuses but that still does not stop it from having inequalities.  You cannot say that it's perfectly equal any more than you can say any other system is perfectly equal.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Here is the verse you posted with an addition:


Spoiler



“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils(arabic word is khumur) over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31)



The noun khimar (of which khumur is plural) denotes the head-covering customarily used by Arabian women as an ornament (not as hijab to cover their head) before and after the advent of Islam. According to most of the classical commentators, it was worn in pre-Islamic times more or less as an ornament and was let down loosely over the wearer's back; and since, in accordance with the fashion prevalent at the time, the upper part of a woman's tunic had a wide opening in the front, her chest was left bare. Hence, the injunction to cover the bosom by means of a khimar (a term so familiar to the contemporaries of the Prophet) does not necessarily relate to the use of a khimar as such but is, rather, meant to make it clear that a woman's chest is not included in the concept of "what may decently be apparent" of her body and should not, therefore, be displayed. Covering of the head, therefore is not a requirement.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yep, I've read all that.  Sounds really good doesn't it.  But that's not actually Islam.  That's a modern interpretation that goes against what Mohammed and his companions taught.  There are many many westernised and modern Muslim women who do not wear the Hijab, and I agree that that verse can justify it, however it is not Islamic jurisprudence nor is it what Mohammed taught was the meaning of the verse.  Mohammed said women of menstrual age should cover all but their face and their hands.  Are you going to say that Mohammed didn't know best about Islam?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I read it several times and there never was an instance in which I found it unclear. I really cannot think of anything that the Quran does not cover. I you could provide an example I would be grateful. And what does the order I read it in change? Contrary to many people, I didn't read the Quran in the regular order, but rather by interest. A "this surah looks interesting, I'll read it" sort off order, thing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've just pointed out several instances where it was obviously unclear to you as you took the wrong meanings from them.  What does the order you read it in change what it says?  Well it puts everything in context for a start, so you can see where one verse is referring to another that was recently said.  It also shows you how Mohammeds preaching changed from peaceful and accepting to violent and conquering.  It also helps you find the abrogated verses easier.  And it helps point out some of the dodgy things that Mohammed said that help to show that he was making it up as he went along.  Rather than dipping and diving into the Qu'ran because some things look interesting read the whole thing.  Once in Uthman order and once in written order.  It'll help paint a clearer picture of some of the verses.  And I'd also recommend reading more than just the sites that push Islam in a positive way in order to help combat Islamophobia and help it feel more palatable to Westerners.  Read the proper Islam.  Most modern Westernised Muslims don't follow the same kind of Islam that they do in the Middle East, they're far more liberal.  Although in the UK there seems to be a growth in the numbers that want to return to the more conservative Islam.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler: #1



“And certainly We created you, THEN We fashioned you, THEN We said to the angels: Make obeisance to Adam. So they did obeisance except Iblis; he was not of those who did obeisance.”

The particle “Thumma” which means “Then” and which divides the timeline between these three events is indicative of the fact that mankind’s creation was prior to Adam, as is the past tense form “Khalaqnakum” ‘We created you all’ and ‘Sawarnakum’ ‘We shaped you all’. As it is after creation of mankind and after giving it shapes that Adam comes on the scene and not before, therefore it is wrong to conclude that Adam is the first human being.





Spoiler: #2



“What ails you, that you look not for majesty in God, seeing HE CREATED YOU BY STAGES?”

Human creation is not instantaneous like Adam and Eve of the Old Testament but in stages, as per Qur’an.





Spoiler: #3



“And Allah has made you GROW OUT OF THE EARTH AS A GROWTH:”

The above further lends support to the view of stages of creation of humanity and negates the view of an instant creation of man and woman in the garden of Eden.

The above and more verses demonstrate that the Qur’an does not forward the view that mankind came about through Adam and Eve and dictates its own terms on the concept of human creation.


ost for TrolleyDave too then.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And the survey says... "Incorrect".  As lots of people like to say to critics of Islam, that's completely out of context.  You can take a verse or line out of a huge amount of books and use it to prove things that they had no knowledge or make it seem like it supports things it does not.  I can take lines out of the Qu'ran that shows that Apostates are the ones that God guides and Muslims are abandoned by him.

Read this, it'll tell you all about what the stages of Mankinds development was.  The "grow out of the earth as a growth" thing is also misquoted in order to attach a scientific fact to it.

edit : Oops, forgot the link! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> <a href="http://www.searchtruth.com/tafsir/Quran/7/index.html#sdfootnote10sym" target="_blank">http://www.searchtruth.com/tafsir/Quran/7/...sdfootnote10sym</a>

And again, apologies for the delay in the reply.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

NO PROBLEM! Family comes first....your apologies accepted.
I think we should address issues turn by turn.....first lets see why are there two women witnesses to a single men.

"O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allah, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable himself to dictate, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). You should not become weary to write it (your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with Allah; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, save when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down.   But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So be afraid of Allah; and Allah teaches you. And Allah is the All-Knower of each and everything."

The Noble Verse above is quite clear about providing either two reliable men or 2 reliable women in a substitution for each man in any court.  But why did Allah Almighty order such a law? What is the Divine Wisdom behind it?

The Noble Verse above does not in anyway talk about women's intelligence or memory capabilities or brains.  It is simply talking about the women's complete integrity.  Women are by far more emotional than men.  This by itself will effect the woman's ACCURACY in her witness if she is asked to explain what happened in a certain event.

Let us look at few differences between men and women to understand better:

1-   Women have a lot more patience and emotions in them than men.  This is one of the blessings that Allah Almighty had created in women to enable them to raise children.   Men do not have enough patience in them, nor enough loving emotions in them to raise children.

2-   Women can easily get frightened.  Man can't.  It takes a lot to frighten a normal average man.


Let us look at the following Saying from Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:  "The Prophet said, "Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?" The women said, "Yes." He said, "This is because of the deficiency of a woman's mind."   (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Witnesses, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 826)"

Notice very carefully here that Prophet Muhammad said "woman's mind" and not "woman's brain".  No where in any Islamic doctrine do we see any ridiculous uneducated and unscientific claim against women or anyone.  The women's brains and ability to think is not what is being criticized here.  It is as I said above their complete integrity.  Notice how Allah Almighty said in the Noble Verse "...it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves...(The Noble Quran, 2:282)" So it is the perfect justice and the 100% complete accuracy that Allah Almighty is concerned about here. 

Here are some Scientific Facts:


Spoiler



Are two women equal to one man in Islam?

[Ref Noble Qur'aan 2:282]

"O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allah, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable himself to dictate, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). You should not become weary to write it (your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with Allah; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, save when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down.   But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So be afraid of Allah; and Allah teaches you. And Allah is the All-Knower of each and everything."

This particular verse has frequently been used by Christian missionary and other anti-Islaam elements as an unusual and absurd claim that has nothing to do with the issue being raised in a twisted and perverted fashion. First and foremost this verse is addressing an issue in conjunction of least ideal situation which may or may not arise. But if it does, than let us explore why?

Men and women have their gender, biological, physical, and emotional differences [to name few], which results in different medical, mental, health, and psychological conditions. Those in denial or ignorant will dispute this fact without realizing that Noble Qur'aan 1,421 years ago actually protected women forever with this very verse. Many reasons which effects women's health have been discovered by modern science in recent age and will continue to be explored in future. Let us see some of those facts which impairs a woman's everyday life not to mention concentration..



Premenstrual Syndrome
(Late Luteal Phase Dysphoric Disorder)
Premenstrual Syndrome (Late Luteal Phase Dysphoric Disorder) is a concept of which the validity has been questioned for decades. While based on clinical reality, with at least 60% of all women suffering from it, PMS has served as a tool for diminishing women, for enforcing stereotypes about their unpredictable and uncontrollable character, and for ridiculing their assertive behavior. The notion of PMS got so woven into the texture of our psycho-social fabric that many women self-diagnose themselves (or let their partners do so) without really having the disorder; while others who actually do need help go untreated because they (or their doctors) simply ""don't believe" in PMS. Stereotypes are rich soil for self-fulfilling prophecy. The best way to conquer these stereotypes is through education.



Osteoporosis
Menopause is a distinct phase of a woman's life with its own special health needs and issues. Without a doubt, the single most important concern of the post menopausal women remains osteoporosis, or thinning and brittle bones.

· Traumas

· Eating Disorders

· Health Disorders



Endometriosis
It is a painful disease that may afflict 10 percent of women of child-bearing age. Endometriosis can go undetected and untreated by the medical community and wreak havoc on the sufferer's life. Many women who suffer from endometriosis eventually undergo unnecessary hysterectomies.



Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most frequent anxiety disorders with current prevalence of 1.6% and lifetime prevalence 5.1% (Wittchen, Zhao, Kessler, & Eaton, 1994). It is a chronic condition which, despite some fluctuations, is relatively stable with continuous symptom pattern (Rickels & Schweizer, 1990; Brown, Barlow & Liebowitz, 1994). It's a state of continuous apprehension and anticipation of something horrible, characterized by excessive anxiety and unrealistic worry. It often affects social and occupational functioning and might have disruptive influence on the patients' families. The impact on the patients' perception of his/her emotional and physical well-being is great.



Panic disorder and Agoraphobia
Did you know that almost 14 % of general population suffers from one of the anxiety disorders? And did you know that the majority are women? One of the most common anxiety disorders is panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (even more common are simple phobias, such as fear of heights, darkness, animals etc.). The psychological, social and economical consequences of this disorders are enormous. Many kinds of effective treatments exist. Still, a great number of panic and agoraphobic patients struggle alone, afraid of confiding in their physicians because of the stigma attached to mental problems. Some physicians fail to recognize the symptoms. If you suffer from hyperventilation, palpitations, tingling sensations, dizziness or chest pain that suddenly come and suddenly disappear, you might be suffering from panic disorder. Wait no longer. There is help.



Relationship Issues
a.. Arguing
b.. Co-dependency
c.. Making Relationships Work
d.. Negative Thinking
e.. Sleep Hygiene

For some, falling asleep is as simple as laying back into a soft pillow. But for others, it is a frustrating process of tossing, turning and glancing nervously at the advancing clock. Whether you awake refreshed and ready to face the day or red-eyed and sluggish depends on your sleep hygiene. Sleep hygiene is your personal collection of habits that determine the quality of your sleep.

For further information check this link of American medical Association [Women's Health Issues] <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/special/womh/womh.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ama-assn.org/special/womh/womh.htm</a>

American Medical Association <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/" target="_blank">http://www.ama-assn.org/</a>

American Psychological Association [Women's Health] <a href="http://helping.apa.org/" target="_blank">http://helping.apa.org/</a>

American Psychological Association <a href="http://www.apa.org/" target="_blank">http://www.apa.org/</a>

There are literally hundreds of mental, psychological, medical and emotional conditions that modern science has discovered that a women suffers from her birth till she dies, let alone PMS or Child birth, to death in family, or sickness or death of child of close kin. To avoid lengthy response I have provided the links above. Where one can find expert opinions and women's health info.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 2, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3676893:date=May 31 2011, 10:06 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ May 31 2011, 10:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3676893"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NO PROBLEM! Family comes first....your apologies accepted.
I think we should address issues turn by turn.....first lets see why are there two women witnesses to a single men.

"O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allah, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable himself to dictate, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). You should not become weary to write it (your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with Allah; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, save when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down.   But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So be afraid of Allah; and Allah teaches you. And Allah is the All-Knower of each and everything."

The Noble Verse above is quite clear about providing either two reliable men or 2 reliable women in a substitution for each man in any court.  But why did Allah Almighty order such a law? What is the Divine Wisdom behind it?

The Noble Verse above does not in anyway talk about women's intelligence or memory capabilities or brains.  It is simply talking about the women's complete integrity.  Women are by far more emotional than men.  This by itself will effect the woman's ACCURACY in her witness if she is asked to explain what happened in a certain event.

Let us look at few differences between men and women to understand better:

1-   Women have a lot more patience and emotions in them than men.  This is one of the blessings that Allah Almighty had created in women to enable them to raise children.   Men do not have enough patience in them, nor enough loving emotions in them to raise children.

2-   Women can easily get frightened.  Man can't.  It takes a lot to frighten a normal average man.


Let us look at the following Saying from Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:  "The Prophet said, "Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?" The women said, "Yes." He said, "This is because of the deficiency of a woman's mind."   (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Witnesses, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 826)"

Notice very carefully here that Prophet Muhammad said "woman's mind" and not "woman's brain".  No where in any Islamic doctrine do we see any ridiculous uneducated and unscientific claim against women or anyone.  The women's brains and ability to think is not what is being criticized here.  It is as I said above their complete integrity.  Notice how Allah Almighty said in the Noble Verse "...it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves...(The Noble Quran, 2:282)" So it is the perfect justice and the 100% complete accuracy that Allah Almighty is concerned about here. 

Here are some Scientific Facts:


Spoiler



Are two women equal to one man in Islam?

[Ref Noble Qur'aan 2:282]

"O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allah, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable himself to dictate, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). You should not become weary to write it (your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with Allah; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, save when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down.   But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So be afraid of Allah; and Allah teaches you. And Allah is the All-Knower of each and everything."

This particular verse has frequently been used by Christian missionary and other anti-Islaam elements as an unusual and absurd claim that has nothing to do with the issue being raised in a twisted and perverted fashion. First and foremost this verse is addressing an issue in conjunction of least ideal situation which may or may not arise. But if it does, than let us explore why?

Men and women have their gender, biological, physical, and emotional differences [to name few], which results in different medical, mental, health, and psychological conditions. Those in denial or ignorant will dispute this fact without realizing that Noble Qur'aan 1,421 years ago actually protected women forever with this very verse. Many reasons which effects women's health have been discovered by modern science in recent age and will continue to be explored in future. Let us see some of those facts which impairs a woman's everyday life not to mention concentration..



Premenstrual Syndrome
(Late Luteal Phase Dysphoric Disorder)
Premenstrual Syndrome (Late Luteal Phase Dysphoric Disorder) is a concept of which the validity has been questioned for decades. While based on clinical reality, with at least 60% of all women suffering from it, PMS has served as a tool for diminishing women, for enforcing stereotypes about their unpredictable and uncontrollable character, and for ridiculing their assertive behavior. The notion of PMS got so woven into the texture of our psycho-social fabric that many women self-diagnose themselves (or let their partners do so) without really having the disorder; while others who actually do need help go untreated because they (or their doctors) simply ""don't believe" in PMS. Stereotypes are rich soil for self-fulfilling prophecy. The best way to conquer these stereotypes is through education.



Osteoporosis
Menopause is a distinct phase of a woman's life with its own special health needs and issues. Without a doubt, the single most important concern of the post menopausal women remains osteoporosis, or thinning and brittle bones.

· Traumas

· Eating Disorders

· Health Disorders



Endometriosis
It is a painful disease that may afflict 10 percent of women of child-bearing age. Endometriosis can go undetected and untreated by the medical community and wreak havoc on the sufferer's life. Many women who suffer from endometriosis eventually undergo unnecessary hysterectomies.



Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most frequent anxiety disorders with current prevalence of 1.6% and lifetime prevalence 5.1% (Wittchen, Zhao, Kessler, & Eaton, 1994). It is a chronic condition which, despite some fluctuations, is relatively stable with continuous symptom pattern (Rickels & Schweizer, 1990; Brown, Barlow & Liebowitz, 1994). It's a state of continuous apprehension and anticipation of something horrible, characterized by excessive anxiety and unrealistic worry. It often affects social and occupational functioning and might have disruptive influence on the patients' families. The impact on the patients' perception of his/her emotional and physical well-being is great.



Panic disorder and Agoraphobia
Did you know that almost 14 % of general population suffers from one of the anxiety disorders? And did you know that the majority are women? One of the most common anxiety disorders is panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (even more common are simple phobias, such as fear of heights, darkness, animals etc.). The psychological, social and economical consequences of this disorders are enormous. Many kinds of effective treatments exist. Still, a great number of panic and agoraphobic patients struggle alone, afraid of confiding in their physicians because of the stigma attached to mental problems. Some physicians fail to recognize the symptoms. If you suffer from hyperventilation, palpitations, tingling sensations, dizziness or chest pain that suddenly come and suddenly disappear, you might be suffering from panic disorder. Wait no longer. There is help.



Relationship Issues
a.. Arguing
b.. Co-dependency
c.. Making Relationships Work
d.. Negative Thinking
e.. Sleep Hygiene

For some, falling asleep is as simple as laying back into a soft pillow. But for others, it is a frustrating process of tossing, turning and glancing nervously at the advancing clock. Whether you awake refreshed and ready to face the day or red-eyed and sluggish depends on your sleep hygiene. Sleep hygiene is your personal collection of habits that determine the quality of your sleep.

For further information check this link of American medical Association [Women's Health Issues] <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/special/womh/womh.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ama-assn.org/special/womh/womh.htm</a>

American Medical Association <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/" target="_blank">http://www.ama-assn.org/</a>

American Psychological Association [Women's Health] <a href="http://helping.apa.org/" target="_blank">http://helping.apa.org/</a>

American Psychological Association <a href="http://www.apa.org/" target="_blank">http://www.apa.org/</a>

There are literally hundreds of mental, psychological, medical and emotional conditions that modern science has discovered that a women suffers from her birth till she dies, let alone PMS or Child birth, to death in family, or sickness or death of child of close kin. To avoid lengthy response I have provided the links above. Where one can find expert opinions and women's health info.


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

All I see there is someone trying to retain Mohammeds reputation as "the perfect man" and "the example for all mankind for all-time".  None of these things were thought, taught or mentioned about this verse until more recent times.  And the reason for the change of thinking?  It's because in Liberal Secular democracies we have learnt from our mistakes and pasts and cast off our old, outdated stereotyped views passed on through religion about women.  Our morals have improved, and as our morals begin to excel those of Mohammeds so scholars and apologists have had to rewrite Islamic history and the meanings of what Mohammed says in order to maintain the illusion that he was the most moral person in history.  If our morals and outlook hadn't changed then neither would the meaning of this verse/Hadith.  Is this piece written a hundred years ago?  Two hundred years ago?  No, it's written in modern times.  Show me a piece written by a scholar closer to Mohammeds time that says this is what he meant and I'll believe it.  One from even just 100 years ago will do.

Until then I'll take what he said at face value.  Specially when he also said and did all these other things :



Spoiler



Allah's Messenger said, "When a man calls his wife to satisfy his desire she must go to him even if she is occupied at the oven." - Al-Tirmidhi 3257

Allah's Apostle  said, "If a husband calls his wife to his bed (i.e. to have sexual relation) and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning." - Bukhari 4:460

The Prophet  said: "I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers were women who were ungrateful." It was asked, "Do they disbelieve in Allah?" (or are they ungrateful to Allah?) He replied, "They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the good (charitable deeds) done to them. If you have always been good (benevolent) to one of them and then she sees something in you (not of her liking), she will say, 'I have never received any good from you." - Bukhari 1:28

Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." - Bukhari 6:302

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: that while he was sitting with Allah's Apostle he said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence." - Sahih Bukhari 3:34:432

Muhammad b. Qais said (to the people): Should I not narrate to you (a hadith of the Holy Prophet) on my authority and on the authority of my mother? We thought that he meant the mother who had given him birth. He (Muhammad b. Qais) then reported that it was 'A'isha who had narrated this: Should I not narrate to you about myself and about the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi'. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O 'A'isha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? - Sahih Muslim 4:2127



If Mohammed really was the champion of women then why would he allow them to be taken as war booty?  Why would he allow female slaves?  Why would he have taken female captives himself?  Now matter how you try to spin this Mohammeds own actions count as evidence against him.  If you look at the picture as a whole, rather than at the snippets that are shown to you to make him seem like "the perfect man" you see that he viewed women as inferior to men and as property.  If the morals of the average non-believer hadn't have grown then none of these Hadiths would ever have been questioned.  It's just that the modern non-believers morals are becoming vastly superior to Mohammeds, therefore the need to defend what he said and protect his reputation has arisen.  Why did God not teach Mohammed that slavery is wrong and why did Mohammed no pass that message on?  We as humans learnt our lesson a long time ago.  Should our morals excel those of an All Knowing, All Wise and All Compassionate and perfect being?  If they do then surely he should be worshipping and submitting to us, not the other way around.  Unless you'd like to tell me now that slavery is OK and moral?

Moving on to the article itself that you posted.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Noble Verse above does not in anyway talk about women's intelligence or memory capabilities or brains.  It is simply talking about the women's complete integrity.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

How many times does the Qu'ran actually mention the brain at all?  As for critiquing womens integrity, don't you think that's a little bigoted and prejudicial?  You can no more judge a woman based on womanhood than you can an individual Muslim based on other Muslims.  Otherwise the saying "All Muslims are terrorist" holds weight, and we both know that argument holds no weight whatsoever.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Women are by far more emotional than men.  This by itself will effect the woman's ACCURACY in her witness if she is asked to explain what happened in a certain event.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Women are not far more emotional than men.  Please educate yourself.  There are women who are more emotional than men, yes.  There are however men who are more emotional than women.  You can not judge a indivuidal based on a group, you can only judge an individual.  As for emotion effecting the accuracy of a womans testimony, men suffer the same problem.  Emotion is a human trait, not just a female one.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1-   Women have a lot more patience and emotions in them than men.  This is one of the blessings that Allah Almighty had created in women to enable them to raise children.   Men do not have enough patience in them, nor enough loving emotions in them to raise children.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What complete and utter bollocks.  It's this kind of belief that used to stop deserving men from getting custody of their children after a divorce.  Women are no more naturally patient than men.  Patience is a virtue that is learnt, it's not a natural emotion.  If it was a natural human trait then there would be no impatience, and clearly the world is full of impatient people.  And as for men not having enough loving emotions in them to raise children, you can pop that thought in an envelope and post it back to the pre-1950's.  There are plenty of men with more than enough loving emotions in them.  There are plenty of men who do an incredible job of raising their children to be kind, helpful and productive members of society.  To say any different is bigoted and stereotyping.  There are very few types of people you can judge based upon the collective group that they belong to.  Again I refer you to the phrase "All Muslims are terrorists".  Is this true?  No it isn't.  So why is it fair for you to say "All men are so and so"?  It is absolutely no different.  The internet is a huge (virtual) place that holds more information than one man could learn in a life time.  I suggest using it.  I know you're taught to only ask scholars and only refer to things that scholars have said, written and taught but there is a psychological reason behind that.  Break free from it and learn for yourself, you'll be surprised by some of the things you'll learn. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->2-   Women can easily get frightened.  Man can't.  It takes a lot to frighten a normal average man.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What you're scared of depends upon both your upbringing and experiences.  Male Muslims are afraid of Satan and Hell.  My niece isn't.  There is absolutely no proof of either Satan or Hell, so therefore Muslim men are frightened of what is essentially a fairy tale.  So tell me, in this case who is more easily frightened?  Is it a grown Male Muslim man or my 13-yr old niece?  And again, you're stereotyping.  People must be judged on individual traits.  Not all Mexicans are lazy, not all Pakistani's are Muslims, not all English people are posh, not all Welsh people are farmers, not all Scottish people are drunks, not all Black people are "gangsta's", not all Italian's are in the Mafia, not all Germans are Nazi's, not all Americans are fat, not all Indians are Hindu.  Do you see the problem with both your thinking and the logic behind the person who wrote this article?  They make huge sweeping generalisations, if even one women is less easily frightened than a man or one man is more easily frightened than a woman then the whole article is meaningless and baseless.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Notice very carefully here that Prophet Muhammad said "woman's mind" and not "woman's brain".  No where in any Islamic doctrine do we see any ridiculous uneducated and unscientific claim against women or anyone.  The women's brains and ability to think is not what is being criticized here.  It is as I said above their complete integrity.  Notice how Allah Almighty said in the Noble Verse "...it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves...(The Noble Quran, 2:282)" So it is the perfect justice and the 100% complete accuracy that Allah Almighty is concerned about here.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And again I ask, exactly how many times is the word "brain" used in the Qu'ran?  Integrity is something that is learnt, it makes up part of our morals.  It all comes from the persons brain as that is our thought centre.  I know Zakir Naik would like you to believe that we have a soul but sorry to break this to you - we don't.  Everything comes from the brain.  To criticise someones integrity is to criticise their upbringing, their belief system and their brain.  I'll also say that once again this is a case of stereotyping.  You can not question a persons integrity based on someone elses.  And really if the Abrahamic God was all knowing and all wise he would know this.  If he doesn't then that means that I have a better moral standard than the Abrahamic God.

As for perfect justice and 100% complete accuracy being the concern here, that's just more bollocks.  If perfect justice and 100% accuracy was the concern here then there would be no stereotyping, as stereotyping is not 100% accurate nor is it just.  I'll use a couple of lines from the article itself "Stereotypes are rich soil for self-fulfilling prophecy. The best way to conquer these stereotypes is through education.".


----------



## GreatZimkogway (Jun 2, 2011)

Spoiler



<!--quoteo(post=3680933:date=Jun 1 2011, 08:17 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 1 2011, 08:17 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3680933"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3676893:date=May 31 2011, 10:06 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ May 31 2011, 10:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3676893"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NO PROBLEM! Family comes first....your apologies accepted.
I think we should address issues turn by turn.....first lets see why are there two women witnesses to a single men.

"O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allah, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable himself to dictate, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). You should not become weary to write it (your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with Allah; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, save when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down.   But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So be afraid of Allah; and Allah teaches you. And Allah is the All-Knower of each and everything."

The Noble Verse above is quite clear about providing either two reliable men or 2 reliable women in a substitution for each man in any court.  But why did Allah Almighty order such a law? What is the Divine Wisdom behind it?

The Noble Verse above does not in anyway talk about women's intelligence or memory capabilities or brains.  It is simply talking about the women's complete integrity.  Women are by far more emotional than men.  This by itself will effect the woman's ACCURACY in her witness if she is asked to explain what happened in a certain event.

Let us look at few differences between men and women to understand better:

1-   Women have a lot more patience and emotions in them than men.  This is one of the blessings that Allah Almighty had created in women to enable them to raise children.   Men do not have enough patience in them, nor enough loving emotions in them to raise children.

2-   Women can easily get frightened.  Man can't.  It takes a lot to frighten a normal average man.


Let us look at the following Saying from Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:  "The Prophet said, "Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?" The women said, "Yes." He said, "This is because of the deficiency of a woman's mind."   (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Witnesses, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 826)"

Notice very carefully here that Prophet Muhammad said "woman's mind" and not "woman's brain".  No where in any Islamic doctrine do we see any ridiculous uneducated and unscientific claim against women or anyone.  The women's brains and ability to think is not what is being criticized here.  It is as I said above their complete integrity.  Notice how Allah Almighty said in the Noble Verse "...it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves...(The Noble Quran, 2:282)" So it is the perfect justice and the 100% complete accuracy that Allah Almighty is concerned about here. 

Here are some Scientific Facts:


Spoiler



Are two women equal to one man in Islam?

[Ref Noble Qur'aan 2:282]

"O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allah, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable himself to dictate, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). You should not become weary to write it (your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with Allah; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, save when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down.   But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So be afraid of Allah; and Allah teaches you. And Allah is the All-Knower of each and everything."

This particular verse has frequently been used by Christian missionary and other anti-Islaam elements as an unusual and absurd claim that has nothing to do with the issue being raised in a twisted and perverted fashion. First and foremost this verse is addressing an issue in conjunction of least ideal situation which may or may not arise. But if it does, than let us explore why?

Men and women have their gender, biological, physical, and emotional differences [to name few], which results in different medical, mental, health, and psychological conditions. Those in denial or ignorant will dispute this fact without realizing that Noble Qur'aan 1,421 years ago actually protected women forever with this very verse. Many reasons which effects women's health have been discovered by modern science in recent age and will continue to be explored in future. Let us see some of those facts which impairs a woman's everyday life not to mention concentration..



Premenstrual Syndrome
(Late Luteal Phase Dysphoric Disorder)
Premenstrual Syndrome (Late Luteal Phase Dysphoric Disorder) is a concept of which the validity has been questioned for decades. While based on clinical reality, with at least 60% of all women suffering from it, PMS has served as a tool for diminishing women, for enforcing stereotypes about their unpredictable and uncontrollable character, and for ridiculing their assertive behavior. The notion of PMS got so woven into the texture of our psycho-social fabric that many women self-diagnose themselves (or let their partners do so) without really having the disorder; while others who actually do need help go untreated because they (or their doctors) simply ""don't believe" in PMS. Stereotypes are rich soil for self-fulfilling prophecy. The best way to conquer these stereotypes is through education.



Osteoporosis
Menopause is a distinct phase of a woman's life with its own special health needs and issues. Without a doubt, the single most important concern of the post menopausal women remains osteoporosis, or thinning and brittle bones.

· Traumas

· Eating Disorders

· Health Disorders



Endometriosis
It is a painful disease that may afflict 10 percent of women of child-bearing age. Endometriosis can go undetected and untreated by the medical community and wreak havoc on the sufferer's life. Many women who suffer from endometriosis eventually undergo unnecessary hysterectomies.



Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most frequent anxiety disorders with current prevalence of 1.6% and lifetime prevalence 5.1% (Wittchen, Zhao, Kessler, & Eaton, 1994). It is a chronic condition which, despite some fluctuations, is relatively stable with continuous symptom pattern (Rickels & Schweizer, 1990; Brown, Barlow & Liebowitz, 1994). It's a state of continuous apprehension and anticipation of something horrible, characterized by excessive anxiety and unrealistic worry. It often affects social and occupational functioning and might have disruptive influence on the patients' families. The impact on the patients' perception of his/her emotional and physical well-being is great.



Panic disorder and Agoraphobia
Did you know that almost 14 % of general population suffers from one of the anxiety disorders? And did you know that the majority are women? One of the most common anxiety disorders is panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (even more common are simple phobias, such as fear of heights, darkness, animals etc.). The psychological, social and economical consequences of this disorders are enormous. Many kinds of effective treatments exist. Still, a great number of panic and agoraphobic patients struggle alone, afraid of confiding in their physicians because of the stigma attached to mental problems. Some physicians fail to recognize the symptoms. If you suffer from hyperventilation, palpitations, tingling sensations, dizziness or chest pain that suddenly come and suddenly disappear, you might be suffering from panic disorder. Wait no longer. There is help.



Relationship Issues
a.. Arguing
b.. Co-dependency
c.. Making Relationships Work
d.. Negative Thinking
e.. Sleep Hygiene

For some, falling asleep is as simple as laying back into a soft pillow. But for others, it is a frustrating process of tossing, turning and glancing nervously at the advancing clock. Whether you awake refreshed and ready to face the day or red-eyed and sluggish depends on your sleep hygiene. Sleep hygiene is your personal collection of habits that determine the quality of your sleep.

For further information check this link of American medical Association [Women's Health Issues] <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/special/womh/womh.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ama-assn.org/special/womh/womh.htm</a>

American Medical Association <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/" target="_blank">http://www.ama-assn.org/</a>

American Psychological Association [Women's Health] <a href="http://helping.apa.org/" target="_blank">http://helping.apa.org/</a>

American Psychological Association <a href="http://www.apa.org/" target="_blank">http://www.apa.org/</a>

There are literally hundreds of mental, psychological, medical and emotional conditions that modern science has discovered that a women suffers from her birth till she dies, let alone PMS or Child birth, to death in family, or sickness or death of child of close kin. To avoid lengthy response I have provided the links above. Where one can find expert opinions and women's health info.


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

All I see there is someone trying to retain Mohammeds reputation as "the perfect man" and "the example for all mankind for all-time".  None of these things were thought, taught or mentioned about this verse until more recent times.  And the reason for the change of thinking?  It's because in Liberal Secular democracies we have learnt from our mistakes and pasts and cast off our old, outdated stereotyped views passed on through religion about women.  Our morals have improved, and as our morals begin to excel those of Mohammeds scholars and apologists have had to rewrite Islamic history and the meanings of what Mohammed says in order to maintain the illusion that he was the most moral person in history.  If our morals and outlook hadn't changed then neither would the meaning of this verse.  Is this piece written a hundred years ago?  Two hundred years ago?  No, it's written in modern times.  Show me a piece written by a scholar closer to Mohammeds time that says this is what he meant and I'll believe it.  One from even just 100 years ago will do.

Until then I'll take what he said at face value.  Specially when he also said and did all these other things :



Spoiler



Allah's Messenger said, "When a man calls his wife to satisfy his desire she must go to him even if she is occupied at the oven." - Al-Tirmidhi 3257

Allah's Apostle  said, "If a husband calls his wife to his bed (i.e. to have sexual relation) and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning." - Bukhari 4:460

The Prophet  said: "I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers were women who were ungrateful." It was asked, "Do they disbelieve in Allah?" (or are they ungrateful to Allah?) He replied, "They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the good (charitable deeds) done to them. If you have always been good (benevolent) to one of them and then she sees something in you (not of her liking), she will say, 'I have never received any good from you." - Bukhari 1:28

Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." - Bukhari 6:302

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: that while he was sitting with Allah's Apostle he said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence." - Sahih Bukhari 3:34:432

Muhammad b. Qais said (to the people): Should I not narrate to you (a hadith of the Holy Prophet) on my authority and on the authority of my mother? We thought that he meant the mother who had given him birth. He (Muhammad b. Qais) then reported that it was 'A'isha who had narrated this: Should I not narrate to you about myself and about the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi'. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O 'A'isha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? - Sahih Muslim 4:2127



If Mohammed really was the champion of women then why would he allow them to be taken as war booty?  Why would he allow female slaves?  Why would he have taken female captives himself?  Now matter how you try to spin this Mohammeds own actions count as evidence against him.  If you look at the picture as a whole, rather than at the snippets that are shown to you to make him seem like "the perfect man" you see that he viewed women as inferior to men and as property.  If the morals of the average non-believer hadn't have grown then none of these Hadiths would ever have been questioned.  It's just that the modern non-believers morals are becoming vastly superior to Mohammeds, therefore the need to defend what he said and protect his reputation has arisen.  Why did God not teach Mohammed that slavery is wrong and why did Mohammed no pass that message on?  We as humans learnt our lesson a long time ago.  Should our morals excel those of an All Knowing, All Wise and All Compassionate and perfect being?  If they do then surely he should be worshipping and submitting to us, not the other way around.  Unless you'd like to tell me now that slavery is OK and moral?

Moving on to the article itself that you posted.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Noble Verse above does not in anyway talk about women's intelligence or memory capabilities or brains.  It is simply talking about the women's complete integrity.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

How many times does the Qu'ran actually mention the brain at all?  As for critiquing womens integrity, don't you think that's a little bigoted and prejudicial?  You can no more judge a woman based on womanhood than you can an individual Muslim based on other Muslims.  Otherwise the saying "All Muslims are terrorist" holds weight, and we both know that argument holds no weight whatsoever.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Women are by far more emotional than men.  This by itself will effect the woman's ACCURACY in her witness if she is asked to explain what happened in a certain event.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Women are not far more emotional than men.  Please educate yourself.  There are women who are more emotional than men, yes.  There are however men who are more emotional than women.  You can not judge a indivuidal based on a group, you can only judge an individual.  As for emotion effecting the accuracy of a womans testimony, men suffer the same problem.  Emotion is a human trait, not just a female one.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1-   Women have a lot more patience and emotions in them than men.  This is one of the blessings that Allah Almighty had created in women to enable them to raise children.   Men do not have enough patience in them, nor enough loving emotions in them to raise children.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What complete and utter bollocks.  It's this kind of belief that used to stop deserving men from getting custody of their children after a divorce.  Women are no more naturally patient than men.  Patience is a virtue that is learnt, it's not a natural emotion.  If it was a natural human trait then there would be no impatience, and clearly the world is full of impatient people.  And as for men not having enough loving emotions in them to raise children, you can pop that thought in an envelope and post it back to the pre-1950's.  There are plenty of men with more than enough loving emotions in them.  There are plenty of men who do an incredible job of raising their children to be kind, helpful and productive members of society.  To say any different is bigoted and stereotyping.  There are very few types of people you can judge based upon the collective group that they belong to.  Again I refer you to the phrase "All Muslims are terrorists".  Is this true?  No it isn't.  So why is it fair for you to say "All men are so and so"?  It is absolutely no different.  The internet is a huge (virtual) place that holds more information than one man could learn in a life time.  I suggest using it.  I know you're taught to only ask scholars and only refer to things that scholars have said, written and taught but there is a psychological reason behind that.  Break free from it and learn for yourself, you'll be surprised by some of the things you'll learn. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->2-   Women can easily get frightened.  Man can't.  It takes a lot to frighten a normal average man.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What you're scared of depends upon both your upbringing and experiences.  Male Muslims are afraid of Satan and Hell.  My niece isn't.  There is absolutely no proof of either Satan or Hell, so therefore Muslim men are frightened of what is essentially a fairy tale.  So tell me, in this case who is more easily frightened?  Is it a grown Male Muslim man or my 13-yr old niece?  And again, you're stereotyping.  People must be judged on individual traits.  Not all Mexicans are lazy, not all Pakistani's are Muslims, not all English people are posh, not all Welsh people are farmers, not all Scottish people are drunks, not all Black people are "gangsta's", not all Italian's are in the Mafia, not all Germans are Nazi's, not all Americans are fat, not all Indians are Hindu.  Do you see the problem with both your thinking and the logic behind the person who wrote this article?  They make huge sweeping generalisations, if even one women is less easily frightened than a man or one man is more easily frightened than a woman then the whole article is meaningless and baseless.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Notice very carefully here that Prophet Muhammad said "woman's mind" and not "woman's brain".  No where in any Islamic doctrine do we see any ridiculous uneducated and unscientific claim against women or anyone.  The women's brains and ability to think is not what is being criticized here.  It is as I said above their complete integrity.  Notice how Allah Almighty said in the Noble Verse "...it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves...(The Noble Quran, 2:282)" So it is the perfect justice and the 100% complete accuracy that Allah Almighty is concerned about here.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And again I ask, exactly how many times is the word "brain" used in the Qu'ran?  Integrity is something that is learnt, it makes up part of our morals.  It all comes from the persons brain as that is our thought centre.  I know Zakir Naik would like you to believe that we have a soul but sorry to break this to you - we don't.  Everything comes from the brain.  To criticise someones integrity is to criticise their upbringing, their belief system and their brain.  I'll also say that once again this is a case of stereotyping.  You can not question a persons integrity based on someone elses.  And really if the Abrahamic God was all knowing and all wise he would know this.  If he doesn't then that means that I have a better moral standard than the Abrahamic God.

As for perfect justice and 100% complete accuracy being the concern here, that's just more bollocks.  If perfect justice and 100% accuracy was the concern here then there would be no stereotyping, as stereotyping is not 100% accurate nor is it just.  I'll use a couple of lines from the article itself "Stereotypes are rich soil for self-fulfilling prophecy. The best way to conquer these stereotypes is through education.".
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->



Normally I'd say that was a tl;dr...but it was a good read :v


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 2, 2011)

shinkukage09 said:
			
		

> Normally I'd say that was a tl;dr...but it was a good read :v



I try to keep them interesting! lol  It's really only of interest to people interested in the topic tho.  I try to keep them as short as possible, but it's not always easy when discussing religion!


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 6, 2011)

Trolley Dave sorry for not replying to your doubts but I will do that by the next week as I am having my school exams right now...........again I apologize.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 7, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> Trolley Dave sorry for not replying to your doubts but I will do that by the next week as I am having my school exams right now...........again I apologize.



Not a problem at all, take your time.  And good luck on your exams!  I should point out though that these aren't doubts, they are criticisms.  Even if the Abrahamic god existed and appeared before my very eyes and told me he was indeed the one who sent the Qu'ran to Earth I would criticise him and tell him I'd rather be sent to hell then submit to his ideology.


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 7, 2011)

bsfmtl123, you seem to be trying to justify why the Qur'an doesn't offer the same rights to both genders without admitting that the rights are unequal. Yes, men and women have biological differences but so do Black people and White people. Should these differences be grounds for different rights? Would these different rights be justified as long as there was some biological or statistical evidence that backed them up? I certainly don't think so.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 8, 2011)

Cheers Magmorph!  I was beginning to think that either I wasn't putting my point across or I was just looking at the inequal rights thing in some weird and obscure way. lol


----------



## Tanas (Jun 8, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> Cheers Magmorph!  I was beginning to think that either I wasn't putting my point across or I was just looking at the inequal rights thing in some weird and obscure way. lol


Mate, you put your point across very clearly which is probably why the silence, or maybe the silence is just down to what bsfmtl123 (the theist) fears the most, which is being told to think for himself.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 8, 2011)

Cheers Tanas mate!  For now I'll take his word that he's busy with exams, it's about that time of year here so there's a good chance it's about that time of year there.  Totally agree with you on the theists fearing thinking for themselves.  I will give him credit tho, he hasn't done what alot of Muslims have done to me in the past and just flung the old "Islamophobe/Racist" slur at me and refuse to debate any further.

While we wait tho I'll post this video for peoples entertainment! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T5Pm7qLH50[/youtube]


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 9, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3680933:date=Jun 2 2011, 06:17 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 2 2011, 06:17 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3680933"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3676893:date=May 31 2011, 10:06 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ May 31 2011, 10:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3676893"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NO PROBLEM! Family comes first....your apologies accepted.
I think we should address issues turn by turn.....first lets see why are there two women witnesses to a single men.

"O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allah, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable himself to dictate, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). You should not become weary to write it (your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with Allah; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, save when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down.   But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So be afraid of Allah; and Allah teaches you. And Allah is the All-Knower of each and everything."

The Noble Verse above is quite clear about providing either two reliable men or 2 reliable women in a substitution for each man in any court.  But why did Allah Almighty order such a law? What is the Divine Wisdom behind it?

The Noble Verse above does not in anyway talk about women's intelligence or memory capabilities or brains.  It is simply talking about the women's complete integrity.  Women are by far more emotional than men.  This by itself will effect the woman's ACCURACY in her witness if she is asked to explain what happened in a certain event.

Let us look at few differences between men and women to understand better:

1-   Women have a lot more patience and emotions in them than men.  This is one of the blessings that Allah Almighty had created in women to enable them to raise children.   Men do not have enough patience in them, nor enough loving emotions in them to raise children.

2-   Women can easily get frightened.  Man can't.  It takes a lot to frighten a normal average man.


Let us look at the following Saying from Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:  "The Prophet said, "Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?" The women said, "Yes." He said, "This is because of the deficiency of a woman's mind."   (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Witnesses, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 826)"

Notice very carefully here that Prophet Muhammad said "woman's mind" and not "woman's brain".  No where in any Islamic doctrine do we see any ridiculous uneducated and unscientific claim against women or anyone.  The women's brains and ability to think is not what is being criticized here.  It is as I said above their complete integrity.  Notice how Allah Almighty said in the Noble Verse "...it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves...(The Noble Quran, 2:282)" So it is the perfect justice and the 100% complete accuracy that Allah Almighty is concerned about here. 

Here are some Scientific Facts:


Spoiler



Are two women equal to one man in Islam?

[Ref Noble Qur'aan 2:282]

"O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allah, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable himself to dictate, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). You should not become weary to write it (your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with Allah; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, save when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down.   But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So be afraid of Allah; and Allah teaches you. And Allah is the All-Knower of each and everything."

This particular verse has frequently been used by Christian missionary and other anti-Islaam elements as an unusual and absurd claim that has nothing to do with the issue being raised in a twisted and perverted fashion. First and foremost this verse is addressing an issue in conjunction of least ideal situation which may or may not arise. But if it does, than let us explore why?

Men and women have their gender, biological, physical, and emotional differences [to name few], which results in different medical, mental, health, and psychological conditions. Those in denial or ignorant will dispute this fact without realizing that Noble Qur'aan 1,421 years ago actually protected women forever with this very verse. Many reasons which effects women's health have been discovered by modern science in recent age and will continue to be explored in future. Let us see some of those facts which impairs a woman's everyday life not to mention concentration..



Premenstrual Syndrome
(Late Luteal Phase Dysphoric Disorder)
Premenstrual Syndrome (Late Luteal Phase Dysphoric Disorder) is a concept of which the validity has been questioned for decades. While based on clinical reality, with at least 60% of all women suffering from it, PMS has served as a tool for diminishing women, for enforcing stereotypes about their unpredictable and uncontrollable character, and for ridiculing their assertive behavior. The notion of PMS got so woven into the texture of our psycho-social fabric that many women self-diagnose themselves (or let their partners do so) without really having the disorder; while others who actually do need help go untreated because they (or their doctors) simply ""don't believe" in PMS. Stereotypes are rich soil for self-fulfilling prophecy. The best way to conquer these stereotypes is through education.



Osteoporosis
Menopause is a distinct phase of a woman's life with its own special health needs and issues. Without a doubt, the single most important concern of the post menopausal women remains osteoporosis, or thinning and brittle bones.

· Traumas

· Eating Disorders

· Health Disorders



Endometriosis
It is a painful disease that may afflict 10 percent of women of child-bearing age. Endometriosis can go undetected and untreated by the medical community and wreak havoc on the sufferer's life. Many women who suffer from endometriosis eventually undergo unnecessary hysterectomies.



Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most frequent anxiety disorders with current prevalence of 1.6% and lifetime prevalence 5.1% (Wittchen, Zhao, Kessler, & Eaton, 1994). It is a chronic condition which, despite some fluctuations, is relatively stable with continuous symptom pattern (Rickels & Schweizer, 1990; Brown, Barlow & Liebowitz, 1994). It's a state of continuous apprehension and anticipation of something horrible, characterized by excessive anxiety and unrealistic worry. It often affects social and occupational functioning and might have disruptive influence on the patients' families. The impact on the patients' perception of his/her emotional and physical well-being is great.



Panic disorder and Agoraphobia
Did you know that almost 14 % of general population suffers from one of the anxiety disorders? And did you know that the majority are women? One of the most common anxiety disorders is panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (even more common are simple phobias, such as fear of heights, darkness, animals etc.). The psychological, social and economical consequences of this disorders are enormous. Many kinds of effective treatments exist. Still, a great number of panic and agoraphobic patients struggle alone, afraid of confiding in their physicians because of the stigma attached to mental problems. Some physicians fail to recognize the symptoms. If you suffer from hyperventilation, palpitations, tingling sensations, dizziness or chest pain that suddenly come and suddenly disappear, you might be suffering from panic disorder. Wait no longer. There is help.



Relationship Issues
a.. Arguing
b.. Co-dependency
c.. Making Relationships Work
d.. Negative Thinking
e.. Sleep Hygiene

For some, falling asleep is as simple as laying back into a soft pillow. But for others, it is a frustrating process of tossing, turning and glancing nervously at the advancing clock. Whether you awake refreshed and ready to face the day or red-eyed and sluggish depends on your sleep hygiene. Sleep hygiene is your personal collection of habits that determine the quality of your sleep.

For further information check this link of American medical Association [Women's Health Issues] <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/special/womh/womh.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ama-assn.org/special/womh/womh.htm</a>

American Medical Association <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/" target="_blank">http://www.ama-assn.org/</a>

American Psychological Association [Women's Health] <a href="http://helping.apa.org/" target="_blank">http://helping.apa.org/</a>

American Psychological Association <a href="http://www.apa.org/" target="_blank">http://www.apa.org/</a>

There are literally hundreds of mental, psychological, medical and emotional conditions that modern science has discovered that a women suffers from her birth till she dies, let alone PMS or Child birth, to death in family, or sickness or death of child of close kin. To avoid lengthy response I have provided the links above. Where one can find expert opinions and women's health info.


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

All I see there is someone trying to retain Mohammeds reputation as "the perfect man" and "the example for all mankind for all-time".  None of these things were thought, taught or mentioned about this verse until more recent times.  And the reason for the change of thinking?  It's because in Liberal Secular democracies we have learnt from our mistakes and pasts and cast off our old, outdated stereotyped views passed on through religion about women.  Our morals have improved, and as our morals begin to excel those of Mohammeds so scholars and apologists have had to rewrite Islamic history and the meanings of what Mohammed says in order to maintain the illusion that he was the most moral person in history.  If our morals and outlook hadn't changed then neither would the meaning of this verse/Hadith.  Is this piece written a hundred years ago?  Two hundred years ago?  No, it's written in modern times.  Show me a piece written by a scholar closer to Mohammeds time that says this is what he meant and I'll believe it.  One from even just 100 years ago will do.

Until then I'll take what he said at face value.  Specially when he also said and did all these other things :



Spoiler



Allah's Messenger said, "When a man calls his wife to satisfy his desire she must go to him even if she is occupied at the oven." - Al-Tirmidhi 3257

Allah's Apostle  said, "If a husband calls his wife to his bed (i.e. to have sexual relation) and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning." - Bukhari 4:460

The Prophet  said: "I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers were women who were ungrateful." It was asked, "Do they disbelieve in Allah?" (or are they ungrateful to Allah?) He replied, "They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the good (charitable deeds) done to them. If you have always been good (benevolent) to one of them and then she sees something in you (not of her liking), she will say, 'I have never received any good from you." - Bukhari 1:28

Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." - Bukhari 6:302

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: that while he was sitting with Allah's Apostle he said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence." - Sahih Bukhari 3:34:432

Muhammad b. Qais said (to the people): Should I not narrate to you (a hadith of the Holy Prophet) on my authority and on the authority of my mother? We thought that he meant the mother who had given him birth. He (Muhammad b. Qais) then reported that it was 'A'isha who had narrated this: Should I not narrate to you about myself and about the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi'. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O 'A'isha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? - Sahih Muslim 4:2127



If Mohammed really was the champion of women then why would he allow them to be taken as war booty?  Why would he allow female slaves?  Why would he have taken female captives himself?  Now matter how you try to spin this Mohammeds own actions count as evidence against him.  If you look at the picture as a whole, rather than at the snippets that are shown to you to make him seem like "the perfect man" you see that he viewed women as inferior to men and as property.  If the morals of the average non-believer hadn't have grown then none of these Hadiths would ever have been questioned.  It's just that the modern non-believers morals are becoming vastly superior to Mohammeds, therefore the need to defend what he said and protect his reputation has arisen.  Why did God not teach Mohammed that slavery is wrong and why did Mohammed no pass that message on?  We as humans learnt our lesson a long time ago.  Should our morals excel those of an All Knowing, All Wise and All Compassionate and perfect being?  If they do then surely he should be worshipping and submitting to us, not the other way around.  Unless you'd like to tell me now that slavery is OK and moral?

Moving on to the article itself that you posted.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Noble Verse above does not in anyway talk about women's intelligence or memory capabilities or brains.  It is simply talking about the women's complete integrity.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

How many times does the Qu'ran actually mention the brain at all?  As for critiquing womens integrity, don't you think that's a little bigoted and prejudicial?  You can no more judge a woman based on womanhood than you can an individual Muslim based on other Muslims.  Otherwise the saying "All Muslims are terrorist" holds weight, and we both know that argument holds no weight whatsoever.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Women are by far more emotional than men.  This by itself will effect the woman's ACCURACY in her witness if she is asked to explain what happened in a certain event.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Women are not far more emotional than men.  Please educate yourself.  There are women who are more emotional than men, yes.  There are however men who are more emotional than women.  You can not judge a indivuidal based on a group, you can only judge an individual.  As for emotion effecting the accuracy of a womans testimony, men suffer the same problem.  Emotion is a human trait, not just a female one.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1-   Women have a lot more patience and emotions in them than men.  This is one of the blessings that Allah Almighty had created in women to enable them to raise children.   Men do not have enough patience in them, nor enough loving emotions in them to raise children.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What complete and utter bollocks.  It's this kind of belief that used to stop deserving men from getting custody of their children after a divorce.  Women are no more naturally patient than men.  Patience is a virtue that is learnt, it's not a natural emotion.  If it was a natural human trait then there would be no impatience, and clearly the world is full of impatient people.  And as for men not having enough loving emotions in them to raise children, you can pop that thought in an envelope and post it back to the pre-1950's.  There are plenty of men with more than enough loving emotions in them.  There are plenty of men who do an incredible job of raising their children to be kind, helpful and productive members of society.  To say any different is bigoted and stereotyping.  There are very few types of people you can judge based upon the collective group that they belong to.  Again I refer you to the phrase "All Muslims are terrorists".  Is this true?  No it isn't.  So why is it fair for you to say "All men are so and so"?  It is absolutely no different.  The internet is a huge (virtual) place that holds more information than one man could learn in a life time.  I suggest using it.  I know you're taught to only ask scholars and only refer to things that scholars have said, written and taught but there is a psychological reason behind that.  Break free from it and learn for yourself, you'll be surprised by some of the things you'll learn. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->2-   Women can easily get frightened.  Man can't.  It takes a lot to frighten a normal average man.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What you're scared of depends upon both your upbringing and experiences.  Male Muslims are afraid of Satan and Hell.  My niece isn't.  There is absolutely no proof of either Satan or Hell, so therefore Muslim men are frightened of what is essentially a fairy tale.  So tell me, in this case who is more easily frightened?  Is it a grown Male Muslim man or my 13-yr old niece?  And again, you're stereotyping.  People must be judged on individual traits.  Not all Mexicans are lazy, not all Pakistani's are Muslims, not all English people are posh, not all Welsh people are farmers, not all Scottish people are drunks, not all Black people are "gangsta's", not all Italian's are in the Mafia, not all Germans are Nazi's, not all Americans are fat, not all Indians are Hindu.  Do you see the problem with both your thinking and the logic behind the person who wrote this article?  They make huge sweeping generalisations, if even one women is less easily frightened than a man or one man is more easily frightened than a woman then the whole article is meaningless and baseless.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Notice very carefully here that Prophet Muhammad said "woman's mind" and not "woman's brain".  No where in any Islamic doctrine do we see any ridiculous uneducated and unscientific claim against women or anyone.  The women's brains and ability to think is not what is being criticized here.  It is as I said above their complete integrity.  Notice how Allah Almighty said in the Noble Verse "...it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves...(The Noble Quran, 2:282)" So it is the perfect justice and the 100% complete accuracy that Allah Almighty is concerned about here.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And again I ask, exactly how many times is the word "brain" used in the Qu'ran?  Integrity is something that is learnt, it makes up part of our morals.  It all comes from the persons brain as that is our thought centre.  I know Zakir Naik would like you to believe that we have a soul but sorry to break this to you - we don't.  Everything comes from the brain.  To criticise someones integrity is to criticise their upbringing, their belief system and their brain.  I'll also say that once again this is a case of stereotyping.  You can not question a persons integrity based on someone elses.  And really if the Abrahamic God was all knowing and all wise he would know this.  If he doesn't then that means that I have a better moral standard than the Abrahamic God.

As for perfect justice and 100% complete accuracy being the concern here, that's just more bollocks.  If perfect justice and 100% accuracy was the concern here then there would be no stereotyping, as stereotyping is not 100% accurate nor is it just.  I'll use a couple of lines from the article itself "Stereotypes are rich soil for self-fulfilling prophecy. The best way to conquer these stereotypes is through education.".
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


So the thing you are trying to say is that all Human beings have different traits regardless of their gender.........and in the present era I agree with you that females have shown capabilities like those of males................so does this mean Quran does not adhere equal rights to them.
Islam never states that women and men are not morally equal,the inequality lies in their physical differences.

This Verse:


Spoiler



Noble Verse 2:282 "O ye who believe! When ye deal with each other, in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing; let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let not the scribe refuse to write: as God Has taught him, so let him write. Let him who incurs the liability dictate, but let him fear His Lord God, and not diminish aught of what he owes. If they party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable Himself to dictate, let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her. The witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (For evidence). Disdain not to reduce to writing (your contract) for a future period, whether it be small or big: it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves but if it be a transaction which ye carry out on the spot among yourselves, there is no blame on you if ye reduce it not to writing. But take witness whenever ye make a commercial contract; and let neither scribe nor witness suffer harm. If ye do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So fear God; For it is Good that teaches you. And God is well acquainted with all things. If ye are on a journey, and cannot find a scribe, a pledge with possession (may serve the purpose). And if one of you deposits a thing on trust with another, let the trustee (faithfully) discharge his trust, and let him Fear his Lord conceal not evidence; for whoever conceals it, – his heart is tainted with sin. And God knoweth all that ye do."



So why are there two witnesses of women equal to one man in financial transactions?

In an Islamic Society the women are the masters of household and the man is the one who earns(this does not mean that Islam prohibits women from working).......According to the laws of Islamic Society they(men and women) have same beliefs,same rights but different duties.If both men and women earn and there is no one to look after their kids then what would it result in.According to Science neglecting the child physically or emotionally can affect the child in a negative manner. Child neglect is a very common type of child abuse. Child abuse is more than physical abuse. Ignoring the needs of children, putting them in unsupervised or in dangerous situations, making the child feel worthless etc can affect the child and leads to the child feeling very low of themselves and may lead to loneliness in them. Many times this can affect the mental health or social development of the child and may even leave lifelong psychological scars. A child needs to feel loved and cherished.    

Your talking about morals that have improved in the society past 100 or 50 years excel those  of Islam or Muhammad(P.b.u.h)

Islam gave economical rights to the women 1,300 years before the West.

An adult Muslim woman can own, she can dispose or disown any of her property without consulting any one, irrespective whether she is married or she is single. 

In 1870, it was the first time in England, that the West recognized the rights of the married woman, where she was allowed to own or dispose any of her property without consultation.  

I do agree that the women were given their economical rights 1300 years ago - these are ancient rights - but the question is are they modernizing or outdated?

1.



Spoiler



A women in Islam, if she wishes to work she can work - There is no text in the Qur’an or the authentic Hadith which prevents or makes it prohibited for a woman to do any work, as long as it is not unlawful, as long as it is within the preview of the Islamic Shariah, as long as she maintains her Islamic dress code.

But natural, she cannot take up jobs, which exhibit her beauty and body - Like for example, modeling and film acting, and such kind of jobs. 

Many of the professions and  jobs which are prohibited for the woman are also prohibited for the man, for example serving alcohol, working in gambling dens, doing any unethical or dishonest business. All these jobs are prohibited for both men and women.

A true Islamic society requires women to take up profession such as doctors.

We do require female Gynecologists, we do require female nurses, we do require female teachers.

But, a woman in Islam has got no financial obligations - The financial obligation is laid on the shoulders of the man in the family - Therefore she need not work for her livelihood.

But in genuine cases, where there are financial crisis in which both the ends do not meet, she has the option of working.

Here too, no one can force her to work - She works out of her own, absolute free will.



2.



Spoiler



A woman in Islam has been given more financial security, as compared to the man. 

As I told you earlier, the financial obligation is not put on her shoulder - It is put on the shoulder of the man in the family. It is  the duty of the father or the brother, before she is  married and  the duty of the husband or the son, after she is married to look after her lodging, boarding, clothing and  financial aspects of her.



3.



Spoiler



When she gets married, she is on the receiving end. 

She receives a gift - she receives a dower or a marital gift, which is called as ‘Meher 

And it is mentioned in the Qur’an in Surah Nisa, Ch.4  Verse No.4 which says, ‘Give to the woman in dower, a marital gift

For a marriage to solemnize in Islam, ‘Meher is compulsory.

But unfortunately in our Muslim society here, we just keep a nominal ‘Meher to satisfy the Qur’an, say 151 Rupees, or some people give 786 Rupees and they spend lakhs and lakhs of Rupees on the reception, on the decoration, on the flowers, on the lunch parties, on the dinner parties.

In Islam, there is no lower-limit, nor is there an upper limit for ‘Meher - But when a  person can spend lakhs of Rupees on the reception, surely the ‘Meher should be much more. 

There are various cultures which have crept into the Muslim societies, specially in the Indo-Pak area.

They give a small amount of ‘Meher and they expect the wife to give a fridge, to give a T.V set, they expect the wife to give an apartment, to give a car, etc., and a large sum of dowry, depending upon the status of the husband.

If he is a graduate, they may expect 1 lakh - If he is an engineer they may expect 3 lakhs - If he is a doctor they may expect 5 lakhs.



4.



Spoiler



If a Woman works, which she does not have to - whatever earning she gets, it is absolutely her property.  

She need not spend on the household - if she wants to spend it is her free will.

Irrespective how rich the wife is, it is the duty of the husband to give lodging, boarding, clothing and look after the financial aspects of the wife.

In case of divorce or if a wife gets widowed, she is given financial support for the period of ‘Iddah - and if she has children, she is also given child support



5.



Spoiler



Islam gave the right to the women to inherit, centuries ago. 

If you read the Qur’an - in several verses, in Surah Nisa, in Surah Baqarah and in Surah Maidah, it is mentioned that a woman, irrespective she is  a wife or she is  a mother, or a sister, or a daughter, she has a right to inherit. And it has been fixed by God Almighty in the Qur’an.



It should be now clear that whose morals excel whose.

Before I conclude, I’d like to give an example. 

Islam believes in equality between men and women - Equality does not mean identicality.

Suppose in a classroom 2 students, student ‘A and ‘B  during an examination both come out first - Both secure 80% marks - 80 out of 100. 

When you analyze the question paper, the question paper has 10 differ­ent questions, each carrying 10 marks.

In question 1 student ‘A got 9 out of 10, and student ‘B got 7 out of 10 - So in question 1 student ‘A was higher than student ‘B  

In question 2, student ‘A got 7 out of 10 and student ‘B got 9 out of 10 - Student ‘B was higher than student ‘A in question number 2.

In question 3 both of them got 8 out of 10, both were equal.

So when we add up the marks of all the ten questions, both student ‘A and ‘B got 80 out of 100. 

So in short, student ‘A and student ‘B are over all equal.

In some questions ‘A is higher than ‘B in some questions ‘B is higher than ‘A in others both are equal.

In the same fashion, taking the example that since God has given man more strength - Suppose a thief enters the house will you tell, ‘I believe in women’s rights - I believe in women’s rights - will you tell your mother, your sister and your daughter, to go and fight the thief?

No, but natural you’ll fight him - If required they may interfere - Under normal circumstances since God has given you more physical strength, you have to go and tackle the thief. 

So here, in physical strength, man is one degree higher than the woman

Let us take another example where it comes to respecting the parents - The children are supposed to respect the mother 3 times more than the father (as mentioned earlier). 

Here the women have one degree higher than the men - Over all both equal

So Islam believes in equality, not identically - Men and women are over all equal in Islam.

This was in brief, the highlights, of ‘the Women’s Rights in Islam 

After this what the Muslim society did is different - Many of the Muslim societies did not give the women their rights and they deviated away from the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

The Western society is largely responsible for this - because of the Western societies, many Muslim societies have become over protective, over precautions and have gone to one extreme and deviated away from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. 

On the other extreme, some of the Muslim societies turned to the Western culture, and followed their culture.

I want to tell the Western society that if you analyze the women’s rights in Islam according to the Qur’an and the Sunnah - you will realize it is  modernizing and not outdated. 
Demanding dowry from the wife, directly or indirectly is prohibited in Islam.

If the parents of the girl give the girl something out of their own free will, it is  accepted - But demanding or forcing directly or indirectly, it is prohibited in Islam.

Slaves in Islam have been given equal rights it's not that they are forced or treated harshly.

You yourself said that women are not mentally or in any other case deficient(which is true)
than it means that womanhood can determine whats better for them.
That is why they find themselves more secure by converting into Islam.

According to "The Almanac Book of Facts", the population increased 137% within the past decade, Christianity increased 46%, while Islam increased 235%.

In a recent poll in the (US), 100,000 people per year in America alone, are converting to Islam. For every 1 male convert to Islam, 4 females convert to Islam, Why?

It is Clear why Christians are converting.

1. Christian Scientists are declaring the Koran is from God. Visit Here for Christian and atheist Scientists who convert to Islam and why: <a href="http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch13.html" target="_blank">http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library...s-say/ch13.html</a>

2. The Christian Bishops and Priests are admitting the Bible has tensions. <a href="http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch2.1.html" target="_blank">http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library...-say/ch2.1.html</a>

3. Jesus is a Muslim: <a href="http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/4229/jam.html" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/4229/jam.html</a>

The question still remains, why are more women converting than men to Islam ?
Perhaps they realize their Soul is worth the Factual Research.

1. The Bible Convicts Women as the original
Sinners, (ie. Eve picking from the forbidden
tree){Genesis 2:4-3:24}. The Koran Clarifies it
was Adam Not Eve {Qur'an 7:19-25}

2. The Bible says "The Birth of a Daughter is a
loss" {Ecclesiasticus 22:3}. The Qur'an says both
are an Equal Blessing { Qur'an 42:49}

3. The Bible Forbids Women from Speaking in
church {I Corinthians 14:34-35}. The Qur'an says
Women Can argue with the Prophet {58:1}

4. In the Bible, divorced Women are Labeled as
an Adulteress, while men are not {Matthew 5:31-32}. The
Koran does Not have Biblical double standards
{ Qur'an 30:21}

5. In The Bible, Widows and Sisters do Not
Inherit Any Property or Wealth, Only men
do{Numbers 27:1-11}The Koran Abolished this
male greediness { Qur'an 4:22} and God Protects
All.

6. The Bible Allows Multiple Wives{I Kings 11:3}
In The Koran, God limits the number to 4 only
under certain situations (with the Wife's
permission)and Prefers you Marry Only One
Wife{ Qur'an 4:3} The Koran gives the Woman
the Right to Choose who to Marry.

7. "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not
pledged to be married and rapes her and they are
discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty
shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he
has violated her. He can never divorce her as long
as he lives" {Deuteronomy 22:28-30}

One must ask a simple question here, who is
really punished, the man who raped the woman or
the woman who was raped? According to the
Bible, you have to spend the Rest of Your Life
with the man who Raped You.

The Prophet Muhammad Says {Volume 9, Book
86, Number 101} Narrated by Aisha:" It is
essential to have the consent of a virgin (for the
marriage)".

Would the Christian men Reading this prefer the
Women they know to Be Christian or Muslim?

8. The Bible also asks Women to wear veils as in
Islam {I Corinthians 11:3-10}, this lowers the
chance of [censored], (God Forbid), see statistic link
below.

9. Women were given rights to Vote less than a
100 years ago in the (US), while the Quran (42:38) gave
Women Voting rights almost 1,500 years ago.

10. Islam has unconfined Women and has given them
the human right to reach for the sky. There have been
Muslim Women Presidents through out the centuries,
but to this date, the oppressive mentality of the
men in the Western U.S.A. has stopped any Women from becoming
Presidents in predominately Christian countries,
while the Muslim countries have voted for and
elected Female Presidents.  

Sorry to keep you waiting but after seeing people posting something very offensive about me I had to reply earlier even though I have an exam tomorrow.  <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />


----------



## Ace Overclocked (Jun 9, 2011)

SamAsh07 said:
			
		

> I'm a Muslim too, and I actually believe in all this. And to you non-believers out there, let me elaborate for you all.
> 
> 1 – Muslims will defeat the Byzantines, conquer the Constantinople and capture Rome. *Not yet*
> 2 – Very high buildings will be built. *Look at Dubai, US, UK, massive Sky Scrapers are being built and some already exist *
> ...


i'm a muslim too and i'm aware of this and agrre with samash
muslims are going away from their religion
and especially islamist who claim things that god didn't say at all and use it to gain control of the politics
(i remember some guy who said that woment shouldn't work exept if they breastfeed their coworkers... WTF)


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 9, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3702407:date=Jun 9 2011, 04:37 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 9 2011, 04:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3702407"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So the thing you are trying to say is that all Human beings have different traits regardless of their gender.........and in the present era I agree with you that females have shown capabilities like those of males................so does this mean Quran does not adhere equal rights to them.
Islam never states that women and men are not morally equal,the inequality lies in their physical differences.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Like I said before, there are physical differences between black and white people. There are physical differences between every race. Why would we not give everyone equal opportunities just because of their physical state?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This Verse:


Spoiler



Noble Verse 2:282 "O ye who believe! When ye deal with each other, in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing; let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let not the scribe refuse to write: as God Has taught him, so let him write. Let him who incurs the liability dictate, but let him fear His Lord God, and not diminish aught of what he owes. If they party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable Himself to dictate, let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her. The witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (For evidence). Disdain not to reduce to writing (your contract) for a future period, whether it be small or big: it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves but if it be a transaction which ye carry out on the spot among yourselves, there is no blame on you if ye reduce it not to writing. But take witness whenever ye make a commercial contract; and let neither scribe nor witness suffer harm. If ye do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So fear God; For it is Good that teaches you. And God is well acquainted with all things. If ye are on a journey, and cannot find a scribe, a pledge with possession (may serve the purpose). And if one of you deposits a thing on trust with another, let the trustee (faithfully) discharge his trust, and let him Fear his Lord conceal not evidence; for whoever conceals it, – his heart is tainted with sin. And God knoweth all that ye do."



So why are there two witnesses of women equal to one man in financial transactions?

In an Islamic Society the women are the masters of household and the man is the one who earns(this does not mean that Islam prohibits women from working).......According to the laws of Islamic Society they(men and women) have same beliefs,same rights but different duties.If both men and women earn and there is no one to look after their kids then what would it result in.According to Science neglecting the child physically or emotionally can affect the child in a negative manner. Child neglect is a very common type of child abuse. Child abuse is more than physical abuse. Ignoring the needs of children, putting them in unsupervised or in dangerous situations, making the child feel worthless etc can affect the child and leads to the child feeling very low of themselves and may lead to loneliness in them. Many times this can affect the mental health or social development of the child and may even leave lifelong psychological scars. A child needs to feel loved and cherished.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Men are just as capable as women at being stay at home "mothers". The father and mother are not the only people capable of looking after their child either. How is it a reasonable conclusion that if both parents are working the child will be left to be neglected?

You seem to be bending over backwards to include any scientific information as if it adds validity to your argument.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Your talking about morals that have improved in the society past 100 or 50 years excel those  of Islam or Muhammad(P.b.u.h)

Islam gave economical rights to the women 1,300 years before the West.

An adult Muslim woman can own, she can dispose or disown any of her property without consulting any one, irrespective whether she is married or she is single. 

In 1870, it was the first time in England, that the West recognized the rights of the married woman, where she was allowed to own or dispose any of her property without consultation.  

I do agree that the women were given their economical rights 1300 years ago - these are ancient rights - but the question is are they modernizing or outdated?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Islam had revolutionary moral ideas for its time but morals are constantly evolving. It would be rather ridiculous to follow the same moral standards of thousands of years ago.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1.



Spoiler



A women in Islam, if she wishes to work she can work - There is no text in the Qur’an or the authentic Hadith which prevents or makes it prohibited for a woman to do any work, as long as it is not unlawful, as long as it is within the preview of the Islamic Shariah, as long as she maintains her Islamic dress code.

But natural, she cannot take up jobs, which exhibit her beauty and body - Like for example, modeling and film acting, and such kind of jobs. 

Many of the professions and  jobs which are prohibited for the woman are also prohibited for the man, for example serving alcohol, working in gambling dens, doing any unethical or dishonest business. All these jobs are prohibited for both men and women.

A true Islamic society requires women to take up profession such as doctors.

We do require female Gynecologists, we do require female nurses, we do require female teachers.

But, a woman in Islam has got no financial obligations - The financial obligation is laid on the shoulders of the man in the family - Therefore she need not work for her livelihood.

But in genuine cases, where there are financial crisis in which both the ends do not meet, she has the option of working.

Here too, no one can force her to work - She works out of her own, absolute free will.


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So a women can't do what she wants with her body and is only allowed to wear what Islam finds acceptable.

The financial obligation shouldn't be on the man. 
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->2.



Spoiler



A woman in Islam has been given more financial security, as compared to the man. 

As I told you earlier, the financial obligation is not put on her shoulder - It is put on the shoulder of the man in the family. It is  the duty of the father or the brother, before she is  married and  the duty of the husband or the son, after she is married to look after her lodging, boarding, clothing and  financial aspects of her.


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why does having inequality for the men justify having inequality for the women?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->3.



Spoiler



When she gets married, she is on the receiving end. 

She receives a gift - she receives a dower or a marital gift, which is called as ‘Meher 

And it is mentioned in the Qur’an in Surah Nisa, Ch.4  Verse No.4 which says, ‘Give to the woman in dower, a marital gift

For a marriage to solemnize in Islam, ‘Meher is compulsory.

But unfortunately in our Muslim society here, we just keep a nominal ‘Meher to satisfy the Qur’an, say 151 Rupees, or some people give 786 Rupees and they spend lakhs and lakhs of Rupees on the reception, on the decoration, on the flowers, on the lunch parties, on the dinner parties.

In Islam, there is no lower-limit, nor is there an upper limit for ‘Meher - But when a  person can spend lakhs of Rupees on the reception, surely the ‘Meher should be much more. 

There are various cultures which have crept into the Muslim societies, specially in the Indo-Pak area.

They give a small amount of ‘Meher and they expect the wife to give a fridge, to give a T.V set, they expect the wife to give an apartment, to give a car, etc., and a large sum of dowry, depending upon the status of the husband.

If he is a graduate, they may expect 1 lakh - If he is an engineer they may expect 3 lakhs - If he is a doctor they may expect 5 lakhs.


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is just another example of inequality. Your logic seems to be that if both men and women have unequal rights then they somehow balance out.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->4.



Spoiler



If a Woman works, which she does not have to - whatever earning she gets, it is absolutely her property.  

She need not spend on the household - if she wants to spend it is her free will.

Irrespective how rich the wife is, it is the duty of the husband to give lodging, boarding, clothing and look after the financial aspects of the wife.

In case of divorce or if a wife gets widowed, she is given financial support for the period of ‘Iddah - and if she has children, she is also given child support


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is just more of the same. What is the reasoning behind this anyway? Why are women incapable of handling their own financial problems?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->5.



Spoiler



Islam gave the right to the women to inherit, centuries ago. 

If you read the Qur’an - in several verses, in Surah Nisa, in Surah Baqarah and in Surah Maidah, it is mentioned that a woman, irrespective she is  a wife or she is  a mother, or a sister, or a daughter, she has a right to inherit. And it has been fixed by God Almighty in the Qur’an.



It should be now clear that whose morals excel whose.

Before I conclude, I’d like to give an example. 

Islam believes in equality between men and women - Equality does not mean identicality.

Suppose in a classroom 2 students, student ‘A and ‘B  during an examination both come out first - Both secure 80% marks - 80 out of 100. 

When you analyze the question paper, the question paper has 10 differ­ent questions, each carrying 10 marks.

In question 1 student ‘A got 9 out of 10, and student ‘B got 7 out of 10 - So in question 1 student ‘A was higher than student ‘B  

In question 2, student ‘A got 7 out of 10 and student ‘B got 9 out of 10 - Student ‘B was higher than student ‘A in question number 2.

In question 3 both of them got 8 out of 10, both were equal.

So when we add up the marks of all the ten questions, both student ‘A and ‘B got 80 out of 100. 

So in short, student ‘A and student ‘B are over all equal.

In some questions ‘A is higher than ‘B in some questions ‘B is higher than ‘A in others both are equal.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is not a very good analogy. You could use the same argument for giving different races different rights.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In the same fashion, taking the example that since God has given man more strength - Suppose a thief enters the house will you tell, ‘I believe in women’s rights - I believe in women’s rights - will you tell your mother, your sister and your daughter, to go and fight the thief?

No, but natural you’ll fight him - If required they may interfere - Under normal circumstances since God has given you more physical strength, you have to go and tackle the thief. 

So here, in physical strength, man is one degree higher than the woman<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is more of an appeal to tradition than evidence. The tradition being that the man is supposed to be strong and tough while the woman is supposed to be frail and fragile.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Let us take another example where it comes to respecting the parents - The children are supposed to respect the mother 3 times more than the father (as mentioned earlier). 

Here the women have one degree higher than the men - Over all both equal

So Islam believes in equality, not identically - Men and women are over all equal in Islam.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nearly the same thing was said about white and black people in the United States when we still had segregation laws. I implore you to think of an argument that cannot also be used in the justification of unequal rights of people of different races. The reason I keep reiterating this point is because I have yet to see any difference between the justifications you are giving and the justifications that could be given for racism.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This was in brief, the highlights, of ‘the Women’s Rights in Islam 

After this what the Muslim society did is different - Many of the Muslim societies did not give the women their rights and they deviated away from the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

The Western society is largely responsible for this - because of the Western societies, many Muslim societies have become over protective, over precautions and have gone to one extreme and deviated away from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. 

On the other extreme, some of the Muslim societies turned to the Western culture, and followed their culture.

I want to tell the Western society that if you analyze the women’s rights in Islam according to the Qur’an and the Sunnah - you will realize it is  modernizing and not outdated. 
Demanding dowry from the wife, directly or indirectly is prohibited in Islam.

If the parents of the girl give the girl something out of their own free will, it is  accepted - But demanding or forcing directly or indirectly, it is prohibited in Islam.

Slaves in Islam have been given equal rights it's not that they are forced or treated harshly.

You yourself said that women are not mentally or in any other case deficient(which is true)
than it means that womanhood can determine whats better for them.
That is why they find themselves more secure by converting into Islam.

According to "The Almanac Book of Facts", the population increased 137% within the past decade, Christianity increased 46%, while Islam increased 235%.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is an appeal to popularity and it is a logical fallacy. 
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In a recent poll in the (US), 100,000 people per year in America alone, are converting to Islam. For every 1 male convert to Islam, 4 females convert to Islam, Why?

It is Clear why Christians are converting.

1. Christian Scientists are declaring the Koran is from God. Visit Here for Christian and atheist Scientists who convert to Islam and why: <a href="http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch13.html" target="_blank">http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library...s-say/ch13.html</a>

2. The Christian Bishops and Priests are admitting the Bible has tensions. <a href="http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch2.1.html" target="_blank">http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library...-say/ch2.1.html</a>

3. Jesus is a Muslim: <a href="http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/4229/jam.html" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/4229/jam.html</a>

The question still remains, why are more women converting than men to Islam ?
Perhaps they realize their Soul is worth the Factual Research.

1. The Bible Convicts Women as the original
Sinners, (ie. Eve picking from the forbidden
tree){Genesis 2:4-3:24}. The Koran Clarifies it
was Adam Not Eve {Qur'an 7:19-25}

2. The Bible says "The Birth of a Daughter is a
loss" {Ecclesiasticus 22:3}. The Qur'an says both
are an Equal Blessing { Qur'an 42:49}

3. The Bible Forbids Women from Speaking in
church {I Corinthians 14:34-35}. The Qur'an says
Women Can argue with the Prophet {58:1}

4. In the Bible, divorced Women are Labeled as
an Adulteress, while men are not {Matthew 5:31-32}. The
Koran does Not have Biblical double standards
{ Qur'an 30:21}

5. In The Bible, Widows and Sisters do Not
Inherit Any Property or Wealth, Only men
do{Numbers 27:1-11}The Koran Abolished this
male greediness { Qur'an 4:22} and God Protects
All.

6. The Bible Allows Multiple Wives{I Kings 11:3}
In The Koran, God limits the number to 4 only
under certain situations (with the Wife's
permission)and Prefers you Marry Only One
Wife{ Qur'an 4:3} The Koran gives the Woman
the Right to Choose who to Marry.

7. "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not
pledged to be married and rapes her and they are
discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty
shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he
has violated her. He can never divorce her as long
as he lives" {Deuteronomy 22:28-30}

One must ask a simple question here, who is
really punished, the man who raped the woman or
the woman who was raped? According to the
Bible, you have to spend the Rest of Your Life
with the man who Raped You.

The Prophet Muhammad Says {Volume 9, Book
86, Number 101} Narrated by Aisha:" It is
essential to have the consent of a virgin (for the
marriage)".

Would the Christian men Reading this prefer the
Women they know to Be Christian or Muslim?

8. The Bible also asks Women to wear veils as in
Islam {I Corinthians 11:3-10}, this lowers the
chance of [censored], (God Forbid), see statistic link
below.

9. Women were given rights to Vote less than a
100 years ago in the (US), while the Quran (42:38) gave
Women Voting rights almost 1,500 years ago.

10. Islam has unconfined Women and has given them
the human right to reach for the sky. There have been
Muslim Women Presidents through out the centuries,
but to this date, the oppressive mentality of the
men in the Western U.S.A. has stopped any Women from becoming
Presidents in predominately Christian countries,
while the Muslim countries have voted for and
elected Female Presidents.  

Sorry to keep you waiting but after seeing people posting something very offensive about me I had to reply earlier even though I have an exam tomorrow.  <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is hardly relevant to the topic of equal rights at all. Just because Islam is the lesser of two evils doesn't make its moral standards right.

A great deal of your argument appears to be copied and pasted from somewhere else (in fact I just checked and it is <a href="http://www.themuslimwoman.com/WhySoManyWomenConverting.htm" target="_blank">link</a>). I don't know what you found so offensive about what was posted about you but it would be a good idea to think for yourself instead of letting others think for you. Why didn't you construct your own argument instead of copying the ideas of someone else?

Edit:
The more I look the more I'm finding your argument is just plagiarism. It appears to be almost entirely plagiarism. It is rather dishonest to portray someone else's work as your own and not give any credit to the author of that work.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 9, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3703136:date=Jun 9 2011, 09:37 PM:name=Magmorph)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Magmorph @ Jun 9 2011, 09:37 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3703136"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3702407:date=Jun 9 2011, 04:37 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 9 2011, 04:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3702407"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So the thing you are trying to say is that all Human beings have different traits regardless of their gender.........and in the present era I agree with you that females have shown capabilities like those of males................so does this mean Quran does not adhere equal rights to them.
Islam never states that women and men are not morally equal,the inequality lies in their physical differences.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Like I said before, there are physical differences between black and white people. There are physical differences between every race. Why would we not give everyone equal opportunities just because of their physical state?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This Verse:


Spoiler



Noble Verse 2:282 "O ye who believe! When ye deal with each other, in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing; let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let not the scribe refuse to write: as God Has taught him, so let him write. Let him who incurs the liability dictate, but let him fear His Lord God, and not diminish aught of what he owes. If they party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable Himself to dictate, let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her. The witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (For evidence). Disdain not to reduce to writing (your contract) for a future period, whether it be small or big: it is juster in the sight of God, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves but if it be a transaction which ye carry out on the spot among yourselves, there is no blame on you if ye reduce it not to writing. But take witness whenever ye make a commercial contract; and let neither scribe nor witness suffer harm. If ye do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So fear God; For it is Good that teaches you. And God is well acquainted with all things. If ye are on a journey, and cannot find a scribe, a pledge with possession (may serve the purpose). And if one of you deposits a thing on trust with another, let the trustee (faithfully) discharge his trust, and let him Fear his Lord conceal not evidence; for whoever conceals it, – his heart is tainted with sin. And God knoweth all that ye do."



So why are there two witnesses of women equal to one man in financial transactions?

In an Islamic Society the women are the masters of household and the man is the one who earns(this does not mean that Islam prohibits women from working).......According to the laws of Islamic Society they(men and women) have same beliefs,same rights but different duties.If both men and women earn and there is no one to look after their kids then what would it result in.According to Science neglecting the child physically or emotionally can affect the child in a negative manner. Child neglect is a very common type of child abuse. Child abuse is more than physical abuse. Ignoring the needs of children, putting them in unsupervised or in dangerous situations, making the child feel worthless etc can affect the child and leads to the child feeling very low of themselves and may lead to loneliness in them. Many times this can affect the mental health or social development of the child and may even leave lifelong psychological scars. A child needs to feel loved and cherished.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Men are just as capable as women at being stay at home "mothers". The father and mother are not the only people capable of looking after their child either. How is it a reasonable conclusion that if both parents are working the child will be left to be neglected?

You seem to be bending over backwards to include any scientific information as if it adds validity to your argument.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Your talking about morals that have improved in the society past 100 or 50 years excel those  of Islam or Muhammad(P.b.u.h)

Islam gave economical rights to the women 1,300 years before the West.

An adult Muslim woman can own, she can dispose or disown any of her property without consulting any one, irrespective whether she is married or she is single. 

In 1870, it was the first time in England, that the West recognized the rights of the married woman, where she was allowed to own or dispose any of her property without consultation.  

I do agree that the women were given their economical rights 1300 years ago - these are ancient rights - but the question is are they modernizing or outdated?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Islam had revolutionary moral ideas for its time but morals are constantly evolving. It would be rather ridiculous to follow the same moral standards of thousands of years ago.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1.



Spoiler



A women in Islam, if she wishes to work she can work - There is no text in the Qur’an or the authentic Hadith which prevents or makes it prohibited for a woman to do any work, as long as it is not unlawful, as long as it is within the preview of the Islamic Shariah, as long as she maintains her Islamic dress code.

But natural, she cannot take up jobs, which exhibit her beauty and body - Like for example, modeling and film acting, and such kind of jobs. 

Many of the professions and  jobs which are prohibited for the woman are also prohibited for the man, for example serving alcohol, working in gambling dens, doing any unethical or dishonest business. All these jobs are prohibited for both men and women.

A true Islamic society requires women to take up profession such as doctors.

We do require female Gynecologists, we do require female nurses, we do require female teachers.

But, a woman in Islam has got no financial obligations - The financial obligation is laid on the shoulders of the man in the family - Therefore she need not work for her livelihood.

But in genuine cases, where there are financial crisis in which both the ends do not meet, she has the option of working.

Here too, no one can force her to work - She works out of her own, absolute free will.


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So a women can't do what she wants with her body and is only allowed to wear what Islam finds acceptable.

The financial obligation shouldn't be on the man. 
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->2.



Spoiler



A woman in Islam has been given more financial security, as compared to the man. 

As I told you earlier, the financial obligation is not put on her shoulder - It is put on the shoulder of the man in the family. It is  the duty of the father or the brother, before she is  married and  the duty of the husband or the son, after she is married to look after her lodging, boarding, clothing and  financial aspects of her.


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why does having inequality for the men justify having inequality for the women?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->3.



Spoiler



When she gets married, she is on the receiving end. 

She receives a gift - she receives a dower or a marital gift, which is called as ‘Meher 

And it is mentioned in the Qur’an in Surah Nisa, Ch.4  Verse No.4 which says, ‘Give to the woman in dower, a marital gift

For a marriage to solemnize in Islam, ‘Meher is compulsory.

But unfortunately in our Muslim society here, we just keep a nominal ‘Meher to satisfy the Qur’an, say 151 Rupees, or some people give 786 Rupees and they spend lakhs and lakhs of Rupees on the reception, on the decoration, on the flowers, on the lunch parties, on the dinner parties.

In Islam, there is no lower-limit, nor is there an upper limit for ‘Meher - But when a  person can spend lakhs of Rupees on the reception, surely the ‘Meher should be much more. 

There are various cultures which have crept into the Muslim societies, specially in the Indo-Pak area.

They give a small amount of ‘Meher and they expect the wife to give a fridge, to give a T.V set, they expect the wife to give an apartment, to give a car, etc., and a large sum of dowry, depending upon the status of the husband.

If he is a graduate, they may expect 1 lakh - If he is an engineer they may expect 3 lakhs - If he is a doctor they may expect 5 lakhs.


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is just another example of inequality. Your logic seems to be that if both men and women have unequal rights then they somehow balance out.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->4.



Spoiler



If a Woman works, which she does not have to - whatever earning she gets, it is absolutely her property.  

She need not spend on the household - if she wants to spend it is her free will.

Irrespective how rich the wife is, it is the duty of the husband to give lodging, boarding, clothing and look after the financial aspects of the wife.

In case of divorce or if a wife gets widowed, she is given financial support for the period of ‘Iddah - and if she has children, she is also given child support


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is just more of the same. What is the reasoning behind this anyway? Why are women incapable of handling their own financial problems?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->5.



Spoiler



Islam gave the right to the women to inherit, centuries ago. 

If you read the Qur’an - in several verses, in Surah Nisa, in Surah Baqarah and in Surah Maidah, it is mentioned that a woman, irrespective she is  a wife or she is  a mother, or a sister, or a daughter, she has a right to inherit. And it has been fixed by God Almighty in the Qur’an.



It should be now clear that whose morals excel whose.

Before I conclude, I’d like to give an example. 

Islam believes in equality between men and women - Equality does not mean identicality.

Suppose in a classroom 2 students, student ‘A and ‘B  during an examination both come out first - Both secure 80% marks - 80 out of 100. 

When you analyze the question paper, the question paper has 10 differ­ent questions, each carrying 10 marks.

In question 1 student ‘A got 9 out of 10, and student ‘B got 7 out of 10 - So in question 1 student ‘A was higher than student ‘B  

In question 2, student ‘A got 7 out of 10 and student ‘B got 9 out of 10 - Student ‘B was higher than student ‘A in question number 2.

In question 3 both of them got 8 out of 10, both were equal.

So when we add up the marks of all the ten questions, both student ‘A and ‘B got 80 out of 100. 

So in short, student ‘A and student ‘B are over all equal.

In some questions ‘A is higher than ‘B in some questions ‘B is higher than ‘A in others both are equal.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is not a very good analogy. You could use the same argument for giving different races different rights.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In the same fashion, taking the example that since God has given man more strength - Suppose a thief enters the house will you tell, ‘I believe in women’s rights - I believe in women’s rights - will you tell your mother, your sister and your daughter, to go and fight the thief?

No, but natural you’ll fight him - If required they may interfere - Under normal circumstances since God has given you more physical strength, you have to go and tackle the thief. 

So here, in physical strength, man is one degree higher than the woman<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is more of an appeal to tradition than evidence. The tradition being that the man is supposed to be strong and tough while the woman is supposed to be frail and fragile.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Let us take another example where it comes to respecting the parents - The children are supposed to respect the mother 3 times more than the father (as mentioned earlier). 

Here the women have one degree higher than the men - Over all both equal

So Islam believes in equality, not identically - Men and women are over all equal in Islam.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nearly the same thing was said about white and black people in the United States when we still had segregation laws. I implore you to think of an argument that cannot also be used in the justification of unequal rights of people of different races. The reason I keep reiterating this point is because I have yet to see any difference between the justifications you are giving and the justifications that could be given for racism.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This was in brief, the highlights, of ‘the Women’s Rights in Islam 

After this what the Muslim society did is different - Many of the Muslim societies did not give the women their rights and they deviated away from the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

The Western society is largely responsible for this - because of the Western societies, many Muslim societies have become over protective, over precautions and have gone to one extreme and deviated away from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. 

On the other extreme, some of the Muslim societies turned to the Western culture, and followed their culture.

I want to tell the Western society that if you analyze the women’s rights in Islam according to the Qur’an and the Sunnah - you will realize it is  modernizing and not outdated. 
Demanding dowry from the wife, directly or indirectly is prohibited in Islam.

If the parents of the girl give the girl something out of their own free will, it is  accepted - But demanding or forcing directly or indirectly, it is prohibited in Islam.

Slaves in Islam have been given equal rights it's not that they are forced or treated harshly.

You yourself said that women are not mentally or in any other case deficient(which is true)
than it means that womanhood can determine whats better for them.
That is why they find themselves more secure by converting into Islam.

According to "The Almanac Book of Facts", the population increased 137% within the past decade, Christianity increased 46%, while Islam increased 235%.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is an appeal to popularity and it is a logical fallacy. 
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In a recent poll in the (US), 100,000 people per year in America alone, are converting to Islam. For every 1 male convert to Islam, 4 females convert to Islam, Why?

It is Clear why Christians are converting.

1. Christian Scientists are declaring the Koran is from God. Visit Here for Christian and atheist Scientists who convert to Islam and why: <a href="http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch13.html" target="_blank">http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library...s-say/ch13.html</a>

2. The Christian Bishops and Priests are admitting the Bible has tensions. <a href="http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch2.1.html" target="_blank">http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library...-say/ch2.1.html</a>

3. Jesus is a Muslim: <a href="http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/4229/jam.html" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/4229/jam.html</a>

The question still remains, why are more women converting than men to Islam ?
Perhaps they realize their Soul is worth the Factual Research.

1. The Bible Convicts Women as the original
Sinners, (ie. Eve picking from the forbidden
tree){Genesis 2:4-3:24}. The Koran Clarifies it
was Adam Not Eve {Qur'an 7:19-25}

2. The Bible says "The Birth of a Daughter is a
loss" {Ecclesiasticus 22:3}. The Qur'an says both
are an Equal Blessing { Qur'an 42:49}

3. The Bible Forbids Women from Speaking in
church {I Corinthians 14:34-35}. The Qur'an says
Women Can argue with the Prophet {58:1}

4. In the Bible, divorced Women are Labeled as
an Adulteress, while men are not {Matthew 5:31-32}. The
Koran does Not have Biblical double standards
{ Qur'an 30:21}

5. In The Bible, Widows and Sisters do Not
Inherit Any Property or Wealth, Only men
do{Numbers 27:1-11}The Koran Abolished this
male greediness { Qur'an 4:22} and God Protects
All.

6. The Bible Allows Multiple Wives{I Kings 11:3}
In The Koran, God limits the number to 4 only
under certain situations (with the Wife's
permission)and Prefers you Marry Only One
Wife{ Qur'an 4:3} The Koran gives the Woman
the Right to Choose who to Marry.

7. "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not
pledged to be married and rapes her and they are
discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty
shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he
has violated her. He can never divorce her as long
as he lives" {Deuteronomy 22:28-30}

One must ask a simple question here, who is
really punished, the man who raped the woman or
the woman who was raped? According to the
Bible, you have to spend the Rest of Your Life
with the man who Raped You.

The Prophet Muhammad Says {Volume 9, Book
86, Number 101} Narrated by Aisha:" It is
essential to have the consent of a virgin (for the
marriage)".

Would the Christian men Reading this prefer the
Women they know to Be Christian or Muslim?

8. The Bible also asks Women to wear veils as in
Islam {I Corinthians 11:3-10}, this lowers the
chance of [censored], (God Forbid), see statistic link
below.

9. Women were given rights to Vote less than a
100 years ago in the (US), while the Quran (42:38) gave
Women Voting rights almost 1,500 years ago.

10. Islam has unconfined Women and has given them
the human right to reach for the sky. There have been
Muslim Women Presidents through out the centuries,
but to this date, the oppressive mentality of the
men in the Western U.S.A. has stopped any Women from becoming
Presidents in predominately Christian countries,
while the Muslim countries have voted for and
elected Female Presidents.  

Sorry to keep you waiting but after seeing people posting something very offensive about me I had to reply earlier even though I have an exam tomorrow.  <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is hardly relevant to the topic of equal rights at all. Just because Islam is the lesser of two evils doesn't make its moral standards right.

A great deal of your argument appears to be copied and pasted from somewhere else (in fact I just checked and it is <a href="http://www.themuslimwoman.com/WhySoManyWomenConverting.htm" target="_blank">link</a>). I don't know what you found so offensive about what was posted about you but it would be a good idea to think for yourself instead of letting others think for you. Why didn't you construct your own argument instead of copying the ideas of someone else?

Edit:
The more I look the more I'm finding your argument is just plagiarism. It appears to be almost entirely plagiarism. It is rather dishonest to portray someone else's work as your own and not give any credit to the author of that work.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Please stop being dishonest............I never claimed this work as mine.........To prove my facts I need information such as the information posted about the increase in Islam ....................how would I know what is the increase in Muslims in America.........Wake up! i don't live in America i live in Pakistan ......you yourself are being ignorant and just know how to criticize others.

Yes the information i posted was 80% copied from Zakir Naik's notes or explanation on the rights of women.
I from the start have supported Zakir Naik's views that i even posted some of his videos which believe u didn't even bother to watch.


By the way i never meant that Islam gives opportunities according to physical abilities but according to their morals and role in the society.
Roles are drafted out according to Shariah not physical or any other difference between people.In Prophet Muhamad's(P.b.u.h) last sermon he stated that there is no difference between Arab and Non-Arab or White and Black.    

Well you don't know what is the difference between a child living in a Muslim Family and a non-Muslim or any other Family.
I know I have seen the difference.DON'T COMMENT ON IT UNLESS YOU HAVE ENOUGH KNOWLEDGE ABOUT Muslim families. 

I add scientific facts because of you guys.....who would not certainly believe in anything I say.
I find ISLAMIC principals and teachings still too much relevant today...............if everyone follow Islam believe me the world is going to be thousand times better.

The reason for copying  80% of the information from somewhere else is because I was in a hurry.......having Exams .
I apologize for that.
Hope after reading this you will feel a bit more accurate next time <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />


----------



## TheDreamLord (Jun 9, 2011)

See you all 2051 When we're all alive and well! Er hopefully anyway...y'know cancer and smoke...


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 9, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3702407:date=Jun 9 2011, 11:37 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 9 2011, 11:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3702407"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So the thing you are trying to say is that all Human beings have different traits regardless of their gender.........and in the present era I agree with you that females have shown capabilities like those of males................so does this mean Quran does not adhere equal rights to them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No, the things I'm saying are the same things I've been saying all along.  That Islam does not afford equal rights to women and that it does not come from a divine and perfect being.  You may believe that in the present era women have shown capabilities similar to men but it has been true throughout history.  Look at the history of China for good examples, and look at it through actual history books rather than through Islamically slanted ones.  And yes, the Qu'ran does not adhere equal rights to them.  I ask again, are women allowed to have multiple husbands?  We both know the answer is no.  Therefore Islam does not adhere to equal rights to both sexes.  You can throw as many excuses and reasons as you'd like but it still doesn't stop it from being an inequal right.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So why are there two witnesses of women equal to one man in financial transactions?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've shown you why there are two women witnesses.  It's because Mohammed saw them as inferior as shown by statements he made.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In an Islamic Society the women are the masters of household and the man is the one who earns(this does not mean that Islam prohibits women from working).......According to the laws of Islamic Society they(men and women) have same beliefs,same rights but different duties.If both men and women earn and there is no one to look after their kids then what would it result in.According to Science neglecting the child physically or emotionally can affect the child in a negative manner. Child neglect is a very common type of child abuse. Child abuse is more than physical abuse. Ignoring the needs of children, putting them in unsupervised or in dangerous situations, making the child feel worthless etc can affect the child and leads to the child feeling very low of themselves and may lead to loneliness in them. Many times this can affect the mental health or social development of the child and may even leave lifelong psychological scars. A child needs to feel loved and cherished.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I'll agree with you about children needing love and attention when they're younger or psychological problems may develop.  I've read studies on it.  However, it does not need to be the woman who looks after them.  A man is perfectly capable of looking after a child.  The husband and wife should both be the masters of the househould, the whole idea of a parntership is to share the load.  If the woman desires to stay at home then that's fair enough but she should never be taught or told that it's her duty.  It's both parties duty.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Islam gave economical rights to the women 1,300 years before the West.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

When did I say any different?  I've said several times that Islam was ahead of it's time when compared to the West.  However, this isn't 1300 hundred years ago, this is now.  Also you're making the same mistake that all followers of Abrahamic religions make.  You believe that any society that doesn't conform to the Abrahamic religion is uncivilised.  Search China's history.  Women had the same kind of rights that Islam afforded long before Islam came along.  Women were highly respected in Chinese society, enough to become Emperesses and develop highly respected fighting styles.  Also, btw, women had financial rights in Arabia before Islam came along.  Mohammed was looked after by his first wife who was a very successful business woman.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->But natural, she cannot take up jobs, which exhibit her beauty and body - Like for example, modeling and film acting, and such kind of jobs.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Now explain to me why a woman shouldn't be able to take a job where she exhibits her beauty, and do this without having to resort to "Because Islam says" or "Because God says".  Why shouldn't a woman be able to decide what she does with her beauty?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It should be now clear that whose morals excel whose.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It is.  It is ours.  Our morals far excel those of Islam.  Shall I throw out some more examples?  What does Islam say about what should happen to homosexuals?  Does Islam allow a man to marry a young girl and consumate that marriage?  Does Islam allow criticism of Islam?  Does Islam allow criticism of Mohammed?  What does Islam say should happen to those who leave Islam?  What does Islam say about non-believers?  In a Khalifa are non-Muslims allowed to become involved in government?  What is the punishment for theft in Islam?  Does Islam allow slavery?  Does Islam allow the capture of women as war booty?  What does Islam say should happen to those who have pre-marital sex?  What does Islam say should happen to adulterers?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Islam believes in equality between men and women - Equality does not mean identicality.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

When it comes to rights between men and women, or people of different ethnic origins, equality means identicality.  If rights are not identical for all then they are not equal - they are biased.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In the same fashion, taking the example that since God has given man more strength - Suppose a thief enters the house will you tell, ‘I believe in women’s rights - I believe in women’s rights - will you tell your mother, your sister and your daughter, to go and fight the thief?

No, but natural you’ll fight him - If required they may interfere - Under normal circumstances since God has given you more physical strength, you have to go and tackle the thief.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

If my sister, wife or daughter wanted to fight off the thief then they'd be more than welcome to.  My sister has taken on plenty of men in fights, including a couple of idiot youngsters who decided to pull a knife on her.  What you're doing here is throwing out and old outdated stereotype.  Look up a fighting art called Wing Chun and then come back and tell me that women are physically incapable.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Let us take another example where it comes to respecting the parents - The children are supposed to respect the mother 3 times more than the father (as mentioned earlier).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No, each parent should get the amount of respect due to them according to how well they treat their children.  A terrible parent should get little respect and a great parent should get utmost respect.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So Islam believes in equality, not identically - Men and women are over all equal in Islam<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No, Islam believes in gender assigned roles - nothing more nothing less.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I want to tell the Western society that if you analyze the women’s rights in Islam according to the Qur’an and the Sunnah - you will realize it is  modernizing and not outdated.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No, it was modern - then it fell behind and became outdated.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slaves in Islam have been given equal rights it's not that they are forced or treated harshly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So it's alright to own another human being as long as you don't treat them cruelly?  In what way is owning a human being like a commodity moral?  Would you be saying the same thing if it was your mother or sister sold like a Nintendo DS?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You yourself said that women are not mentally or in any other case deficient(which is true)
than it means that womanhood can determine whats better for them.
That is why they find themselves more secure by converting into Islam.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No it's not womanhood than can determine what's better for the woman, it's the woman herself.  If she finds herself identifying with Islam then she's free to become a Muslim.  Now I ask you this, if a Muslim woman found herself identifying with Buddhism would she be free to become a Buddhist?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->According to "The Almanac Book of Facts", the population increased 137% within the past decade, Christianity increased 46%, while Islam increased 235%.

In a recent poll in the (US), 100,000 people per year in America alone, are converting to Islam. For every 1 male convert to Islam, 4 females convert to Islam, Why?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What Zakir Naik has forgotten to mention is that 2 out of 4 of those women are converting because of marriage, and that around 30-40% of those women apostise within 3 years.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The question still remains, why are more women converting than men to Islam ?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Because Muslim women are not allowed to date non-Muslim men but Muslim men are allowed to date outside their religion.  When getting married those non-Muslim women are encouraged to convert to Islam.  That's the reason why the numbers are higher for women.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*snipped out a load of nonsense from another Abrahamic religion for space<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What does any of that have to do with me?  I'm not a Christian.  I have just as many criticisms about Christianity as I do Islam.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sorry to keep you waiting but after seeing people posting something very offensive about me I had to reply earlier even though I have an exam tomorrow.  <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I told you to take your time, I wasn't bothered.  However nobody said anything offensive about you.  If you found it offensive then it was your own interperetation of the words.


----------



## Ace Overclocked (Jun 9, 2011)

the hell?
jesus is not a muslim, he is the prophet of christians he is a christian?
well nowadays muslim women are dating non muslims...


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 9, 2011)

aminemaster said:
			
		

> the hell?
> jesus is not a muslim, he is the prophet of christians he is a christian?
> well nowadays muslim women are dating non muslims...



It's a play on words and a propaganda technique.  Muslim means "one who is in submission to God".  So therefore Jesus was a Muslim, but he was also a Christian prophet.

edit : Also bsfmtl123, I think Magmorph raised some very valid points.  To dismiss him as you did is rude and arrogant.


----------



## Aeter (Jun 9, 2011)

Is it weird that after reading this thread and discussion, I want to start a new religion called TrolleyDavism?


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 10, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> Please stop being dishonest............I never claimed this work as mine.........To prove my facts I need information such as the information posted about the increase in Islam ....................how would I know what is the increase in Muslims in America.........Wake up! i don't live in America i live in Pakistan ......you yourself are being ignorant and just know how to criticize others.
> What did I say that was dishonest? You copied and pasted from web sites without citing the sources. I never said you claimed it as your own I said you portrayed it as your own. You could easily find the increase of Islam in America without copying and pasting a whole article about women in Islam. What am I being ignorant of?
> 
> 
> ...


What did I say that was inaccurate?


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 10, 2011)

Aeter said:
			
		

> Is it weird that after reading this thread and discussion, I want to start a new religion called TrolleyDavism?



I would die inside if anything like that ever happened! lol


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 11, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> That sounds reasonable and good.  However Mohammed himself stated that two female witnesses are equal to one male because of the deficiency of the womans mind.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The idea of a slave/servant is different here. They do what you ask them and they get clothing, food and a place to stay in exchange. It really isn't as bad as the slaves the US had. And the Qur'an teaches that a Muslim should free his slaves, although he can keep his servants.


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 12, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> The Qur'an commands Muslims to make a will. If one is not left, something which shouldn't happen, then that is the default division of the property. Because the Qur'an states that males should, out of gallantry, take the financial charges off the shoulders of their wife, they would get, by default, more. It's called justice.
> Why should that be the responsibility of the man? It is just a gender role. As I said before, women are just as capable of handling their financial problems as men. To suggest otherwise would imply that women are inferior.
> 
> 
> ...


Last I checked most slaves in the US had food, clothing, and a place to stay. How are these slaves different?


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 12, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> Why should that be the responsibility of the man? It is just a gender role. As I said before, women are just as capable of handling their financial problems as men. To suggest otherwise would imply that women are inferior.
> Who said anything about inferiority? The Qur'an just says that, again, out of gallantry, a man should be the one to pay. You know, to be nice.
> 
> 
> ...


They were doing forced work. They lived in bad conditions. They were whipped, weren't feed enough, had minimal clothing. They stayed in bad places. While a slave here is more of a servant, only permanent. And this whole arguments is going nowhere because I already said that the Qur'an tells Muslims to free their slaves.


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 12, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> Who said anything about inferiority? The Qur'an just says that, again, out of gallantry, a man should be the one to pay. You know, to be nice.
> Yes but it is again giving genders unequal rights or unequal responsibilities. The very idea a man should be respectful to a woman just because of her gender is sexist in my mind.
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not trying to argue with you on this point I just don't understand. Why would a Muslim have slaves to release in the first place?


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 12, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Arabs used to have slaves before Muhammad. When they converted, they freed their slaves.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 12, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> I don't believe in the Hadith. I'm neither Sunni, nor Shi'a. *I may very well be considered an apostate or scum of the Earth by other Muslims, that is the Islam I choose to follow.*
> 
> *ahem*
> 
> ...



D'oh, me and my twisted moral code.  Of course owning some is perfectly fine so long as you give them food, clothing and lodging - what was I thinking.  And what's this "in exchange" business?  You do know that the idea of slaves in the Qu'ran comes from people (mostly women and children) captured and kept as "spoils of war".  How is that an "in exchange" deal?  Is it "In exchange for you life you can come and work for for me for nothing more than food, clothing and lodging"?

I'll leave you with this quote to ponder on :

"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg


----------



## Searinox (Jun 12, 2011)

Ancient/secret texts predicting present of future events? Specifically cataclysmic ones? During exactly our generation? How many damn times hasn't this happened already? It's been happening for countless generations.

Those that came true? Selectivity. The times they didn't aren't counted and those that are immediately get pointed at. Like let's say I make a prediction that "the winning lotto numbers will be 1,2,3,4,5,6". With so many runs over ages and ages eventually it WILL happen. Does this mean I had prediction power? Nope. Not to mention these texts are metaphorically interpreted in the way which best interprets current events. That too is a bias.

People also always tend to view the previous generations as more tame and their current one as the most corrupt. Viewing it as the height of evil, people get the feeling that "this is it". This time it's really gonna happen. It never does.

Every argument for such beliefs I've seen had some logical loophole or pitfall somewhere. Those few that didn't were basically saying obvious things such as "the sun will rise again after the night" or "the rain will eventually stop", referring to contexts of some issues of their time. What completes the mesmerizing effect of these predictions is that they're famous texts and to begin with have some supposed "power" so the slightest sensationalistic hint immediately gets taken as "fact" or "proof". I remain decisively unconvinced.

There's tons of these claims per generation, and now recently they've begun incorporating science, with ideas such as black holes colliding with earth in 2012 or some fluctiations of electromagnetic moon radiation interacting with the positrons in our thoughts on a frequency of alpha waves blah blah and whatever you want to add here to make it sound as scientific as possible, all fundamentally motivated to give credance to a claim, NOT to state an observed, true fact. All for the purpose of "appearing to know what they're talking about" and even taking up titles such as "doctor" or "professor".

Whenever I've taken a closer look at any of these claims aswell as what supports them, they fell apart. I've hardly any reason to care.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 12, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> Yes but it is again giving genders unequal rights or unequal responsibilities. The very idea a man should be respectful to a woman just because of her gender is sexist in my mind.
> 
> How is this gender inequality?How are the responsibilities and rights unequal?Please explain!
> A man should be respectful to a woman not because of her gender but her greatness.For example a mother, she is the one who gives birth(through severe pain),she is the one who cares for you,looks after and feeds you her milk.
> ...



A Muslim is encouraged to buy slaves their freedom.It means that Muslims should pay the masters of the salves to free them.
A Muslim can have a slave but there treatment should be equal and just. 

Modesty:
Actually in Islam men are also not allowed to walk with bare chest.Modesty is not only for women but it is also for men.

“Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and be modest.  That is purer for them.  Lo!  God is Aware of what they do.  And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their chests, and not to reveal their adornment.” (Quran 24:30)

The Prophet once said to his companions:

“Be bashful before God according to His right to modesty before Him”.

They said: “O Messenger of God, verily we are shy, praise be to God.”

He said: “That is not it.  Modesty before God according to His right to modesty is that you protect your mind in what it learns; your stomach in what it ingests.  And remember death and the tribulations attached to it; and whoever wishes for the Hereafter, leaves the adornments of this life.

So whoever does all that is truly bashful before God according to His Right to modesty”.

What does acting and modelling involve,a women is shown naked(most of the films)....there is a lip-lock between a man and a woman....even between men and men or women and women.....some films promote sexual feelings and attraction(For example crushes).In Modelling, a sexy woman or a man walks on the ramp,how would the opposite sex feel.

All these things promote a desire for sex.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 12, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> A Muslim is encouraged to buy slaves their freedom.It means that Muslims should pay the masters of the salves to free them.
> A Muslim can have a slave but there treatment should be equal and just.



http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#003.047.765

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#003.034.351

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...t.html#010.3901

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...t.html#015.4112

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...mt.html#004.092

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/33597


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 12, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First of all, I recently converted. And you were one important factor. This thread made me believe more.
Second, are you doing this on purpose? I'm seriously dumbfounded. The only reason that polygamy could be allowed is if the population is critically low. So it's to reproduce faster. Women, even with four husbands can only have one baby per year or so. It isn't faster at all. In fact it's slower because the married husbands can't go reproduce with another women. It makes no sense to allow polyandry in critically low populations. Unless you know of a method for women to have four children from different husbands at the same time.
Third, I won't follow the Hadiths, as they are unreliable, the first being written about two hundred years after the Prophet's death. It's the same reason we Muslims criticize the New Testament. I follow Islam in what I believe to be it's purest form.
Fourth, that definition of beauty is per Hadith. I don't believe in Hadith. The definition I use is from knee to below the neck. There are still risks of STDs even if you take all the precautions in the world. I agree it is her right to do what she wants. Anyone can do whatever the fuck he or she wants. I don't care. But if you want to be a Muslim, those jobs are off limit. Simple as that.
Fifth, I would be very bothered by a woman walking around bare-breasted. Not only is it against my morals, it's outright disturbing. I would never be able to concentrate on anything if I have a pair of breasts in my face.
Sixth, I never said having slaves is OK. I said that 1)Muslims must free slaves and 2)Slaves of Muslim wouldn't have it as bad as you may think.

Now, I suggest we stop this debate as, obviously, neither of us is going to change his opinion and it would be very tiresome to let this go on to infinity, which is probably what is going to happen.


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Jun 12, 2011)

I know the world is ending soon....the floods, disasters, record breaking weather / tornadoes....signs of a oppressing government rising..people's hearts "waxing cold"...extreme corruption with money that no one has ever seen before, homosexuality acceptance in society rising, (as in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah) [I have gay friends] (useless)Wars and Rumors of wars (just to make a shitload of money). I am religious ..I go to church on saturday but...my goal for some reason is to find someone to love right now or lose my virginity...
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





either way as what Morgan Freeman said in Shawshank - "I don't give a shit"


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 12, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> How is this gender inequality?How are the responsibilities and rights unequal?Please explain!
> A man should be respectful to a woman not because of her gender but her greatness.For example a mother, she is the one who gives birth(through severe pain),she is the one who cares for you,looks after and feeds you her milk.
> Even then if you don't respect her than sorry bro Islamic teachings are not outdated or inferior but your thinking is.
> She could have also been an abusive, negligent bitch who left you in a dumpster to die. Just being a woman doesn't earn you respect, being a good person does.
> ...


God forbid people would want to have sex and reproduce. I don't understand religion's obsession with sex. Desire for sex is natural. If we had no desire for sex the species would have died out ages ago.


----------



## Ace Overclocked (Jun 12, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


god forbids sex *if you are not married* with the person you want to make love with
why?
most likely because people would abuse
some people will throw and abandon their children(happens alot lately)
and the list goes on


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 13, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> First of all, I recently converted. And you were one important factor. This thread made me believe more.
> 
> I'm happy to have been of assistance.  Although I don't it believe for one minute, I have absolutely no doubts that you've been a Muslim for alot longer than this thread has been in existence.  I have no problem with people converting to Islam nor Muslims in general.  Everyone has a right to believe what they want.  What I do have a problem with is people using both propaganda and Dawahganda.  If you're going to promote something that claims to be "the ultimate truth" then you shouldn't have to tell lies to do it, the truth should speak for itself.  The same argument holds weight for those who criticise it using lies to make it look bad.
> 
> ...



I'm not here to change your opinion.  I couldn't care whether you're a believer or not.  The problem I have is you painting a rosier picture of Islam than it actually is.  I have a problem with anyone doing this for any religion or political ideal (of which Islam falls under both categories).


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 13, 2011)

In my opinion, women should be able to stay home and be with the kids.  But in this society that is a really hard thing to do now, since you need more workers in the family to support the family.  I do think that the man should be the one in charge in the house(such as if something happens its his fault, and he should make a higher income then her) but that doesn't mean the woman will not be able to make decisions.  Plus what the hell would you do at home the whole day.   Another thing women should be able to wear anything they want such as being half naked as you describe it.  How do they cover themselves like that it would be so HOT in the summer.  Plus I would honestly want to be outside seeing girls that are half naked then girls covering themselves(kind of gay if you would want them to cover themselves).


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 13, 2011)

I totally agree that women should be able to stay at home if they want to, and you're assessment of modern life causing a problem is spot on.  I just don't think the person staying at home should be gender specific tho.  Men are more than capable of looking after a household and raising children so why not give them the freedom to do it.  Putting a stigma on it is wrong.  I've met plenty of women who prefer to go to work and support their husband because it helps them feel liberated from the age old stereotypes that religion and sexism has forced on them.

I disagree with you that "it's kind of gay" (I hate that wording btw) if someone wants women to be covered tho.  I don't think gay men really care whether a woman is covered up or not! lol  I think the covering up of women is more a case of men wanting to be in control, along with other reasons like men who are worried they can't control their lust (and that type of thing).  Instead of blaming women for their shortcomings tho and forcing them to cover they should work on their shortfalls.


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 13, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> I totally agree that women should be able to stay at home if they want to, and you're assessment of modern life causing a problem is spot on.  I just don't think the person staying at home should be gender specific tho.  Men are more than capable of looking after a household and raising children so why not give them the freedom to do it.  Putting a stigma on it is wrong.  I've met plenty of women who prefer to go to work and support their husband because it helps them feel liberated from the age old stereotypes that religion and sexism has forced on them.
> 
> I disagree with you that "it's kind of gay" (I hate that wording btw) if someone wants women to be covered tho.  I don't think gay men really care whether a woman is covered up or not! lol  I think the covering up of women is more a case of men wanting to be in control, along with other reasons like men who are worried they can't control their lust (and that type of thing).  Instead of blaming women for their shortcomings tho and forcing them to cover they should work on their shortfalls.


I know I was just trying to say a I would rather see a hot half naked woman, then someone being covered all over up.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 13, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No seriously, I newly converted. At first I was trying to give you a Muslim's point of view as I know enough about the Qur'an to do so.

It's not because Muslims are marrying several wives that they should. As I explained, it's a extreme measure. It isn't something males have the "right" to do, it's a measure that must be applied in critical circumstances. In history, this circumstance only happened once. Call it unequal treatment if you want to, I call it a logical emergency measure.

In my point of view, the Shia and Sunni are the sects and I only follow true Islam. If you want to put a name on it, you could call it Quranism, but I prefer just Islam.

The Nikab and Burka is equally disturbing to me. 

I know slavery is immoral. But, let's face it, slaves of Arabs weren't as harshly treated. Also, read this on war prisoner treatment in Islam: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_war_in_Islam


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 13, 2011)

How about the Jews in egypt?


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 13, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> TrolleyDave said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Have you converted?Pyrmon24 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Everyone needs to get some facts very straight:

1.Islam only tells to marry more than one woman under certain circumstances.
2.Islam never initiated polygamy but it restricted it.
3.The time when the verse regarding polygamy was revealed women were greater in number and men population was low.
Then how would it be possible for a women to marry more than one man.  
4.Don't judge Islam according to the present Muslim Ummah.
5.Not only women but men also have a certain dress code in Islam
6.No one is here to change the other person's opinion,the discussion on Islam is to answer those queries which are against it so everyone can have a better view of it regardless of it's image(which has been deteriorated over the years).
7. Islam wasn't created by Prophet Muhammad(S.A.W) but Allah Almighty,and it existed from the days of Prophet Adam(first human being).
8.Women and Men are given just(meaning justice) rights in Islam.
9.Islam has never restricted women to house work......she has freedom to do whatever she can that the man can do but it should be in accordance with religion.
10.In Islam it is said that,"Every Muslim is a brother of another Muslim."So every slave or servant should be treated like a brother..................and Islam forbids a person to treat them harshly.
11.Islam gave slaves just rights and recognition but it did not tell people to buy them or keep them as servants.
12.For the full understanding of Islam(not Quran) Hadith are to some extent essential and obligatory to follow(Only those which are authentic and aren't against the Quran.
13.Not all Muslims are Shias and Sunnis,I am a Muslim and i only follow the word of Allah.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 13, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yes, what's wrong with it?
If a women refuses her husband for sex without a valid reason then what would happen..................there is a possibility that the man may indulge in social evils such as 



Spoiler



[censored]


 or adultery.Who caused it to happen the wife....so she is punishable. 

I have told so many times that Muslims bought slaves from those people who were cruel and treated them harshly and even if they did not..................then the slaves were dealt mercifully,helpfully and with affection.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 13, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> How is this gender inequality?How are the responsibilities and rights unequal?Please explain!
> A man should be respectful to a woman not because of her gender but her greatness.For example a mother, she is the one who gives birth(through severe pain),she is the one who cares for you,looks after and feeds you her milk.
> Even then if you don't respect her than sorry bro Islamic teachings are not outdated or inferior but your thinking is.
> She could have also been an abusive, negligent bitch who left you in a dumpster to die. Just being a woman doesn't earn you respect, being a good person does.
> ...



Allah forbids sex without marriage........desire for sex at the age of 10-15 is too strong that you are sometimes forced to [censored] someone or cheat a girl........It also creates a feeling homosexuality........ 
That is why Islam orders marriage when your sexual passion is very high even if you are 15 years old or less.


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 13, 2011)

You are intentionally making a straw man out of almost every argument I make and then acting condescending about it as the straw man burns. If Islam is perfect you should have to use so many logical fallacies to prove it.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 13, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> You are intentionally making a straw man out of almost every argument I make and then acting condescending about it the straw man burns. If Islam is perfect you should have to use so many logical fallacies to prove it.



Same applies to you as well......I didn't find anything logical in your previous post.


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 13, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> Magmorph said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, point out what was illogical about it without using a straw man.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 14, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> No seriously, I newly converted. At first I was trying to give you a Muslim's point of view as I know enough about the Qur'an to do so.
> 
> Sorry, I just find that really hard to believe - no offence.  I understand what you're saying about trying to give me a Muslim's point of view but this isn't the first time I've discussed/debated Islam.  There have been plenty of people I've met who can give a Muslim's point of view but those people have actually also understood where criticism of Islam is necessary.  Whereas you have always outright refused to criticise it.  Your stance on slavery in Islam is a good example.  I'm not going to call you an outright liar as that would be unjust and I have little more than a gut instinct to go on but my personal opinion is that you're being liberal with the truth when you say you're newly converted.  I don't think you converted in the last few weeks though.  Like I say, I think you were a Muslim long before you made those statements claiming you weren't.
> 
> ...



Like I say, it doesn't matter to me in the slightest how slaves were treated.  Just the fact that they are slaves means they are being treated inhumanely.  Say it with me - "The Qu'ran is wrong for promoting slavery as ok"! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Slavery should never ever be considered ok in any circumstances.  Anyone who thinks that it can be justified even in the slightest needs to take a long hard look at themselves and the morals they have.  I know you agree that slavery is immoral, which is a very good start, but you still attempt to justify Muslims owning slaves which is wrong.  I don't think you're a bad guy, in fact I think your morals surpass those of your religion - I just think you have a problem questioning the morals of your religion because of your faith in it.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 14, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3711633:date=Jun 13 2011, 08:13 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 13 2011, 08:13 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3711633"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Everyone needs to get some facts very straight:

1.Islam only tells to marry more than one woman under certain circumstances.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That's misleading and a play on words.  Those circumstances are only that they are able to deal fairly and justly with each wife, giving them equal time, care and money.  There is no restriction on when and where other than that. <a href="http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=82971" target="_blank">http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.ph...Id&Id=82971</a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->3.The time when the verse regarding polygamy was revealed women were greater in number and men population was low.
Then how would it be possible for a women to marry more than one man.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes, but the law has never been cast aside because there is no-one who has the power to do it.  Only "God" or a prophet can change the rule, and as Mohammed declared that there will be no more prophets then there is no-one capable of changing the rule.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->4.Don't judge Islam according to the present Muslim Ummah.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Complete copout.  Of course you can judge Islam based on the Ummah because the Ummah exists based on the various teachings/sects of Islam.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->5.Not only women but men also have a certain dress code in Islam<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Men have more freedom than women when it comes to that dress code though.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->6.No one is here to change the other person's opinion,the discussion on Islam is to answer those queries which are against it so everyone can have a better view of it regardless of it's image(which has been deteriorated over the years).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

As I've said before, mine are not queries.  I've queried and research all the things that I had doubts about.  While I admit that my mind could be changed, for the moment these are criticisms.  If the Abrahamic god existed and appeared before me I would still level these very same criticisms.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->7. Islam wasn't created by Prophet Muhammad(S.A.W) but Allah Almighty,and it existed from the days of Prophet Adam(first human being).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That's a belief caused by faith, that's not a fact.  When you can prove to me that the Abrahamic god exists using facts rather than assumptions and faith I'll believe it.  As far as I'm concerned all the evidence points towards both the Abrahamic god not existing and Mohammed having developed the Qu'ran himself.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->8.Women and Men are given just(meaning justice) rights in Islam.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So a Muslim is free to leave Islam without an repercussion's whatsoever?  And people are free to criticise Mohammed and Islam in an Islamic society with any fear of any retribution?  And Islam completely prohibits slavery?  Are women free to dress however they choose and make a career path of their choice without restriction?  Are women entitled to protection from their husband and a guarantee from the law that they will never be physically struck?  Is a non-believer free to become involved in an Islamic government?  Are women free to deny their husband sexual favours without "being cursed by the angels for a night"?  Are women free to date whoever they choose, even if that person is an Athiest, Christian, Jew, Buddhist, Hindu etc?  Does Islam see non-believers and Muslims are completely equal or does it state "the best of non-believers is not equal to the worst of Muslims" and "non-believers are the vilest of creatures"?  Women and Men are not given just rights in Islam, they are given what it believes are just rights.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->10.In Islam it is said that,"Every Muslim is a brother of another Muslim."So every slave or servant should be treated like a brother..................and Islam forbids a person to treat them harshly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That's all well and good, but what does it say about non-believers?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->11.Islam gave slaves just rights and recognition but it did not tell people to buy them or keep them as servants.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Did Islam say that slavery is immoral, unjust and should never be allowed under any circumstances?

<!--quoteo(post=3711649:date=Jun 13 2011, 08:26 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 13 2011, 08:26 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3711649"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3709938:date=Jun 12 2011, 06:45 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 12 2011, 06:45 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3709938"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3709777:date=Jun 12 2011, 12:56 PM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 12 2011, 12:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3709777"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->A Muslim is encouraged to buy slaves their freedom.It means that Muslims should pay the masters of the salves to free them.
A Muslim can have a slave but there treatment should be equal and just.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/047.sbt.html#003.047.765" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#003.047.765</a>

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/034.sbt.html#003.034.351" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#003.034.351</a>

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/010.smt.html#010.3901" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...t.html#010.3901</a>

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/015.smt.html#015.4112" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...t.html#015.4112</a>

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/004.qmt.html#004.092" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...mt.html#004.092</a>

<a href="http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/33597" target="_blank">http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/33597</a>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, what's wrong with it?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You completely missed the point of why I posted those.  Let me explain them to you and hopefully that'll help you understand.

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/047.sbt.html#003.047.765" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#003.047.765</a>

You said Islam encourages people to buy slaves and release them.  The above is an example of someone releasing a slave and Mohammed telling her she would have gotten more reward if she'd have given the slave to someone else.

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/047.sbt.html#003.047.765" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#003.047.765</a>

This is an example of Mohammed selling a slave.  If Islam encouraged people to buy and release slaves then why did the "example to all man-kind" no do that very thing.  Why did he not give the slave owner the money himself and release the slave?

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/010.smt.html#010.3901" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...t.html#010.3901</a>

Another example of Mohammed trading slaves.

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/004.qmt.html#004.092" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...mt.html#004.092</a>

The above is a verse in the Qu'ran that discusses the freeing of a Muslim slave.  It declares that if a Muslim kills another Muslim and the murderer owns a slave who is a Muslim he should free that slave as compensation for his action.  If all people are equal in Islam why is a Muslim allowed to own another Muslim.  Slavery is immoral, unjust and a crime against humanity.  I don't care if it some dusty outdated 1400 year old book written by some bloke in primitive times says it's ok, the fact of the matter is that it's not.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If a women refuses her husband for sex without a valid reason then what would happen..................there is a possibility that the man may indulge in social evils such as 



Spoiler



[censored]


 or adultery.Who caused it to happen the wife....so she is punishable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I had to re-read that a few times just to make sure you actually said what you did.  Seriously, if you were stood in front of me when you said that I would have slapped you across the face for being so ignorant.  The person who caused the adultery or the rape to happen is the man.  If the man is so weak willed that he cannot control his own lust then he should take a long hard look at himself and learn to control himself.  What you just said is an insult to both women and humanity and further proof that Islam teaches that women are second class citizens.  You should be ashamed of yourself sunshine.

And that wasn't even the reason I posted it.  I posted it because the fatwa states that a slave girl has no right to refuse her master if her master wants sex.  How is that treating them fairly?  Shouldn't women have the right to say no?  Although your view above is more than sufficient to answer that question.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have told so many times that Muslims bought slaves from those people who were cruel and treated them harshly and even if they did not..................then the slaves were dealt mercifully,helpfully and with affection.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And I have told you so many times that owning another person is unjust, immoral and a crime against humanity.  There is absolutely no justification you can give for a Muslim being allowed to own another human being like a pet or a video game console.  If you believe there is justification for owning another human being I suggest you take a long hard look at yourself because you have a warped sense of morality.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 14, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> Sorry, I just find that really hard to believe - no offence.  I understand what you're saying about trying to give me a Muslim's point of view but this isn't the first time I've discussed/debated Islam.  There have been plenty of people I've met who can give a Muslim's point of view but those people have actually also understood where criticism of Islam is necessary.  Whereas you have always outright refused to criticise it.  Your stance on slavery in Islam is a good example.  I'm not going to call you an outright liar as that would be unjust and I have little more than a gut instinct to go on but my personal opinion is that you're being liberal with the truth when you say you're newly converted.  I don't think you converted in the last few weeks though.  Like I say, I think you were a Muslim long before you made those statements claiming you weren't.
> I've been on the fence about converting for a few months now. And I've regarded Islam as the best(least bad) religion for even longer. I guess that explains why you think I was Muslim. Maybe I was a Muslim deep down inside, I don't know. All I know is that I have only officially converted in the last few weeks. And to give the proper point of view of a Muslim, I had to say something about the criticism. No?
> 
> 
> ...


I can't find a verse that promotes slavery for the life of me. Please, just give me the verse. I never justified anyone having slaves. I'm just saying that, at least, slaves are well treated until they are freed. And war prisoners are to be freed, as this link says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_war_in_Islam


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 14, 2011)

How could you define a religion being the best/least bad?  I see nothing wrong with Christianity, Judaism, or any other kind of religions.  To me it seems that over history the Muslim people really wanted other people turn to Islam, as they believe that everyone is inferior to everyone.  Just like bsfmtl123 just said if everyone in this world believed in Islam it would be a perfect world. 

I don't see how it would be a perfect world at all, no offense but the muslim people these days affect society very badly, just show me 5 arabs that won a noble prize.  The reason for this is lack of education.


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 14, 2011)

I am, against my better judgement, going to respond to your post. It is hard to have a discussion with someone when they keep misrepresenting your arguments and I don't think calling you out on it is going to change anything. I suggest you look up what logical fallacies are and try not to use them.


			
				bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> It is possible in a society like yours but it is something impossible in an Islamic Society.If she wanted to leave you in a dumpster to die then why did she gave birth to you....???It means that you don't respect your elders because they never tried to be good to u.What if your children don't respect you just because you never tried to earn respect.
> Do you really think so highly of your religion that you think it would be impossible for a child to starve and die due to a negligent parent? Can you not think of any way for a woman to get pregnant with an unwanted baby? You are saying we should respect people regardless of what they have done? If I left my children to starve and die then I wouldn't expect any respect from them.
> 
> 
> ...


Who is forcing you into raping someone? It is the fault of the rapist for raping someone. Who else do you have to blame it on? The woman who gets raped?


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 14, 2011)

Allah forbids sex without marriage?  Is that the reason why parents force there children to marry a man that they pick at the age of 12-15?


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jun 14, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> _snip..._



And this is one of the most abhorrent ideas I've ever heard. The idea that all men are rapists is disgusting.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> How could you define a religion being the best/least bad?  I see nothing wrong with Christianity, Judaism, or any other kind of religions.  To me it seems that over history the Muslim people really wanted other people turn to Islam, as they believe that everyone is inferior to everyone.  Just like bsfmtl123 just said if everyone in this world believed in Islam it would be a perfect world.
> 
> I don't see how it would be a perfect world at all,* no offense but the muslim people these days affect society very badly*, just show me 5 arabs that won a noble prize.  The reason for this is lack of education.
> No offense?
> ...



That post right there was just dumb.

Thats in pretty much every abrahamovic religion.


----------



## DrOctapu (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Allah forbids sex without marriage?  Is that the reason why parents force there children to marry a man that they pick at the age of 12-15?


I propose lock for incoming religious clusterfuck.
Also, inb4 religious clusterfuck.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Allah forbids sex without marriage?  Is that the reason why parents force there children to marry a man that they pick at the age of 12-15?



And have "marriages" that last only as long as an old man can too.

EDIT: And that's done to exchange money for sex but it's not prostitution.


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 14, 2011)

ThatDudeWithTheFood said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


When I said that I meant the religious ones in the east.  And it really seems that way that most muslims feel the other people are inferior it really does. Just look at the Muslim countries name me any that have succeeded like the USA, Canada, Israel, and the European countries or even came close.  Not the case in every religion in Judaism the Jews didn't go around forcing people to convert.


----------



## DrOctapu (Jun 14, 2011)

CHAO1212 JOINS THE FLAMEWAR
I think that we shouldn't follow any religions because they only cause idiotic, poorly thought out, mudslinging-filled arguments like the one in the last few pages here. The world's not going to end any time soon and the very idea that there is any evidence of this is religious fearmongering as it has been for the last billion predictions. Is there an afterlife? Probably not, but you're free to be proud of your religion as much as you want and you're free to believe whatever you want, but that doesn't justify shoving it down everyone's throats, screaming at others who choose to blindly worship one of history's endless parade of gods that isn't yours, and discriminating against people who deviate from your religion's rules but aren't following it anyway. In fact, do you think your god's intention when creating the several groups of people that there are on the Earth was to cause giant, idiotic fights about who was right? No. That's fucking retarded.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Jun 14, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> *snip*


Yet if you actually talked to most muslim people you would find that they are pretty normal.
Do I judge peoples religions on how a minority of them act?

Saudi Arabia and others(Kuwait,Qatar)Even China(it does have a very high muslim population)

I said pretty much not every.


----------



## lolzed (Jun 14, 2011)

Trashed post said:
			
		

> _*snip_


I'm sorry, but the your very post contradicts your idea.
Debates aren't bad,it only gets bad when people flame badly, in which for the past few pages I haven't seen much(for example Jakob's post)


----------



## DrOctapu (Jun 14, 2011)

lolzed said:
			
		

> chao1212 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's pretty much what I meant. I agree with the debates thing, but it's usually impossible when people begin citing the bible and making up interpretations of religious texts to justify and "verify" what they believe.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jun 14, 2011)

ThatDudeWithTheFood said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



When the majorities reaction is "that's not us all but you can't say anything against the terrible bigots" yes.

I've personally worked with people who never had a choice in being Muslims or not and are now wanted dead by their families for being apostates. All we can do in Britain is move them about and hope no one finds where they are or they WILL end up murdered. The majority of Muslims may be fine good people, but they need to stop sticking up for the ones who aren't or they will forever be tarred with the same brush.


----------



## lolzed (Jun 14, 2011)

chao1212 said:
			
		

> That's pretty much what I meant. I agree with the debates thing, but it's usually impossible when people begin citing the bible and making up interpretations of religious texts to justify and "verify" what they believe.


I see no reason to why citing the Bible(or their religious text) as that is what their religion is based on. Interpretations aren't bad, sometimes they can build up the faith, and some are even supported by other text. The only people you should "hate" on are the people who starts the flame war.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Jun 14, 2011)

cwstjdenobs said:
			
		

> ThatDudeWithTheFood said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thats really unfortunate I had never heard of anything like that and that must be a very hard job.


I don't see how when people point out that extremists are just extremists like in any other religion its sticking up for them.


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 14, 2011)

Seriously the Muslims should worry about themselves and stop blaming their problems, at other people and wanting other people to be muslim.   This whole topic wasn't necessary at all does this look like a Muslim forum were you can go around and post Muslim propaganda, did it ever occur to you that the whole world isn't Muslim?  This topic shouldn't belong here go and post it in some Muslim forum.  This is a video game forum.


----------



## DrOctapu (Jun 14, 2011)

lolzed said:
			
		

> chao1212 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What I'm saying is that I'm all for debating religious people, my stance would be atheism, but it's damn near impossible. The vast majority of the time it's the same arguments that religion is true because it can't be debunked, "god answers in three ways, yes, no and not now," and they also tend to cite the bible as a reason for the bible to be true. What's the point in believing something if you have to remove parts of it every few minutes for it to be true? In most cases that easiest and best method is to simply trash that idea and rebuild from there.


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Seriously the Muslims should worry about themselves and stop blaming their problems, at other people and wanting other people to be muslim.   This whole topic wasn't necessary at all does this look like a Muslim forum were you can go around and post Muslim propaganda, did it ever occur to you that the whole world isn't Muslim?  This topic shouldn't belong here go and post it in some Muslim forum.  This is a video game forum.


This is general off topic chat. How many of the threads here are about video games? Obviously some people are interested in this discussion.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Seriously the Muslims should worry about themselves and stop blaming their problems, at other people and wanting other people to be muslim.   This whole topic wasn't necessary at all does this look like a Muslim forum were you can go around and post Muslim propaganda, did it ever occur to you that the whole world isn't Muslim?  This topic shouldn't belong here go and post it in some Muslim forum.  This is a video game forum.


Serious?

Where was anyone trying to get anyone to convert to islam because I don't see that.

Where is this so called muslim propoganda?

Honestly that response makes no sense this topic is obviously being modded by VA so it doesn't get out of control.

You were the one who was simply badmouthing muslims so your response makes no sense.


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 14, 2011)

ThatDudeWithTheFood said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The topic in a whole I mean, such as the topic related which is Signs of Doomsday.  What is the point of posting it in GBAtemp?  This is a gaming forum, not a religious forum.  If he posted this with scientific proof then this would have been another story.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> ThatDudeWithTheFood said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is in General Off topic and as long as it doesnt get out of hand then there is no real reason to close it or delete it its not like its posted in the Wii hacking forum.


----------



## DrOctapu (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Seriously the Muslims should worry about themselves and stop blaming their problems, at other people and wanting other people to be muslim.   This whole topic wasn't necessary at all does this look like a Muslim forum were you can go around and post Muslim propaganda, did it ever occur to you that the whole world isn't Muslim?  This topic shouldn't belong here go and post it in some Muslim forum.  This is a video game forum.


You're really not helping your "muslims hate us for no reason" bit when you go around bashing them without showing any proof.


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 14, 2011)

chao1212 said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't recall saying that Muslims hate us.  But I do have a point that the arab muslims pretty much do.  Do you recall 911, or any of the rest terrorist attacks?


----------



## Nathan Drake (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> chao1212 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Because those completely represent all Muslims. Ignorance is fun!


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 14, 2011)

Nathan Drake said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes and that's why they bomb Israel almost every day.  A jew isn't even allowed to live in most Arab nations if not all.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Nathan Drake said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To be honest both sides are really to blame neither one is actually good.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Nathan Drake said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Do you have sources, proof, anything to back up those statements?


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 14, 2011)

Nathan Drake said:
			
		

> Jakob95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Go to google.com/news everyday and search up Israel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_th...in_Saudi_Arabia
"There is virtually no Jewish activity in Saudi Arabia in the beginning of the 21st century. Jewish (as well as Christian and other non-Muslim) religious services are prohibited from being held on Saudi Arabian soil."
I'm not going to go around and search up every country.  First country that came in my head was Saudi Arabia and I was right.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Jun 14, 2011)

Unless you can provide the proof personally, your statements are nothing but baseless ignorance.

You should learn how this works now, rather then later.


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 14, 2011)

Nathan Drake said:
			
		

> Unless you can provide the proof personally, your statements are nothing but baseless ignorance.
> 
> You should learn how this works now, rather then later.


Look at the post on top of yours I just edited it.  Plus maybe I don't have sources for this, but my parents are from Uzbekistan and they know how everyone there was anti-Semitics and how they insulted and harnessed jews.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jun 14, 2011)

ThatDudeWithTheFood said:
			
		

> cwstjdenobs said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry I wasn't saying you where sticking up for them, just that the normal people Muslims who you speak of need to stop taking the shared persecution and solidarity route with people they apparently (and I know most actually do, but my god can they be as bad a fence sitters and apologists as Catholics, if not worse) totally disagree with the means of.

EDIT: I think I should also mention there are a quite few Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and probably of other faiths I have no idea exist involved in the "rescue" group. More than I am by far. And the group helps people who've converted from one faith to another or none if any physical violence, or threats thereof, is involved.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Nathan Drake said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Of course with all the hate coming from the Israelo-palestinian confilict they are going to hate Jews. But that does not represent Muslims, this is a conflict between Israelis and Arabs, NOT Muslims and Jews. This is completely off-topic of an already off-topic debate.


----------



## Flame (Jun 14, 2011)

atheism for the win.


----------



## Ace Overclocked (Jun 14, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> Nathan Drake said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



it's not true i know many arabic countries where jews live for example tunisia
and shit that's just fucked up because islam said that the three religions should live together in harmony
and that seems impossible right now
anyway saudi arabia is getting fucked up recently look what people do there!


----------



## Waflix (Jun 14, 2011)

Tanveer said:
			
		

> We will see what happens
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But you _can_ think of what might happen because of earlier events. Man kills 2 other men --> Man goes to jail.

----
The man that said the world was going the end a few weeks ago said he maid a mistake. It will now end in October this year.

----
Since there are a lot of human, there are a lot of theories. So I think _the world is going to end every day_.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 15, 2011)

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Everyone needs to get some facts very straight:

1.Islam only tells to marry more than one woman under certain circumstances.


That's misleading and a play on words. Those circumstances are only that they are able to deal fairly and justly with each wife, giving them equal time, care and money. There is no restriction on when and where other than that. <a href="http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.ph...Id&Id=82971" target="_blank">http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.ph...Id&Id=82971</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You can call it "misleading or play on words"  but there are certain circumstances including the consent of the first wife.
Women population much higher than men(one reason),that is why Quran <b>ALLOWS</b>(but does not order) four marriages.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->3.The time when the verse regarding polygamy was revealed women were greater in number and men population was low.
Then how would it be possible for a women to marry more than one man.


Yes, but the law has never been cast aside because there is no-one who has the power to do it. Only "God" or a prophet can change the rule, and as Mohammed declared that there will be no more prophets then there is no-one capable of changing the rule.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Not the Prophet but Only Allah has the authority to change any rule in the Quran.Women population in the present century is also higher than men in some places..................Allah created every rule in the Quran for a purpose.....It might be possible that you may not be able to find any reason for it now but later u will be. 

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->4.Don't judge Islam according to the present Muslim Ummah.


Complete copout. Of course you can judge Islam based on the Ummah because the Ummah exists based on the various teachings/sects of Islam.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The present Ummah is not based on the true teachings of Islam .......this time is the period of ignorance in the Muslim world.
Worldly needs and desires have crept in to their daily lives.Out of hundred only 5 or 4 Muslims can be true followers(I am talking about the present century).People have made sects for their own reliability and remember that every Muslim is not a Sunni or a Shia.Muslims are fighting with each other,hostilities,ignorance........If Muslims are not following Islam in true letters spirit then how can anyone judge Islam according to them.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->5.Not only women but men also have a certain dress code in Islam


Men have more freedom than women when it comes to that dress code though.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes but there are some bodily and physical differences between them.For example:Women have big breasts but men don't.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->6.No one is here to change the other person's opinion,the discussion on Islam is to answer those queries which are against it so everyone can have a better view of it regardless of it's image(which has been deteriorated over the years).


As I've said before, mine are not queries. I've queried and research all the things that I had doubts about. While I admit that my mind could be changed, for the moment these are criticisms. If the Abrahamic god existed and appeared before me I would still level these very same criticisms.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Can you please explain the concept of Abrahamic God?
If God appeares before you.......it means that He existed then don't you think that He would have far more knowledge and power than you do.He is he One Who created a small cell to big planets such as earth which obviously you can't do.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->7. Islam wasn't created by Prophet Muhammad(S.A.W) but Allah Almighty,and it existed from the days of Prophet Adam(first human being).


That's a belief caused by faith, that's not a fact. When you can prove to me that the Abrahamic god exists using facts rather than assumptions and faith I'll believe it. As far as I'm concerned all the evidence points towards both the Abrahamic god not existing and Mohammed having developed the Qu'ran himself.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Which evidence?Please do post them.



Spoiler



The origin of Islam is generally accredited to the prophet Muhammad but to the devout Muslim, Islam began long before Muhammad ever walked the earth. The Qur'an was dictated by Muhammad but, according to the Qur'an, it did not originate with Muhammad. The Qur'an testifies of itself that it was given by God through the angel Gabriel to the prophet Muhammad. "This is a revelation from the Lord of the universe. The Honest Spirit (Gabriel) came down with it, to reveal it into your heart that you may be one of the warners, in a perfect Arabic tongue" (Sura 26:192-195). "Say, 'Anyone who opposes Gabriel should know that he has brought down this (the Qur'an) into your heart, in accordance with God's will, confirming previous scriptures, and providing guidance and good news for the believers'" (Sura 2:97).



This is what you believe that Muhammad(S.A.W) had developed the Quran(By a person who could neither write nor read anything)

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->10.In Islam it is said that,"Every Muslim is a brother of another Muslim."So every slave or servant should be treated like a brother..................and Islam forbids a person to treat them harshly.


That's all well and good, but what does it say about non-believers?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

If you are asking about those verses asking believers to kill the infidels and so on then you should have a look that what happens when people just twist verses out of context and present them as a sign of violence in the Quran.
<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060914001306AA3aptj" target="_blank">http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14001306AA3aptj</a>

For the treatment of Non-Muslims see this page:
<a href="http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/394/" target="_blank">http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/394/</a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I had to re-read that a few times just to make sure you actually said what you did. Seriously, if you were stood in front of me when you said that I would have slapped you across the face for being so ignorant. The person who caused the adultery or the [censored] to happen is the man. If the man is so weak willed that he cannot control his own lust then he should take a long hard look at himself and learn to control himself. What you just said is an insult to both women and humanity and further proof that Islam teaches that women are second class citizens. You should be ashamed of yourself sunshine.

And that wasn't even the reason I posted it. I posted it because the fatwa states that a slave girl has no right to refuse her master if her master wants sex. How is that treating them fairly? Shouldn't women have the right to say no? Although your view above is more than sufficient to answer that question.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Slapped for what....do you have the right to slap me???
If a man is married to a women and he provides her everything of which she is in need of.He treats her with respect.kindness and love still then if the women refuses to comply with her husband...........what if the men refused to have sex with his wife.....how would you view it now.
As far as sex with slave girls is concerned here is what the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad  say to those who by force have sex with their wives and slave girls:


Spoiler



Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29

Narrated Al-Ma'rur: At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names."  The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.

Saheeh Muslim

Book 015, Number 4082:

Hilal b. Yasaf reported that a person got angry and slapped his slave-girl. Thereupon Suwaid b. Muqarrin said to him: You could find no other part (to slap) but the prominent part of her face. See I was one of the seven sons of Muqarrin, and we had but only one slave-girl. The youngest of us slapped her, and Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) commanded us to set her free.

Book 015, Number 4086

Abu Mas'ud al-Badri reported: "I was beating my slave with a whip when I heard a voice behind me: Understand, Abu Masud; but I did not recognise the voice due to intense anger. He (Abu Mas'ud) reported: As he came near me (I found) that he was the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and he was saying: Bear in mind, Abu Mas'ud; bear in mind. Abu Mas'ud. He (Aba Maslad) said: threw the whip from my hand. Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Bear in mind, Abu Mas'ud; verily Allah has more dominance upon you than you have upon your slave. I (then) said: I would never beat my servant in future. 

O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower [money given by the husband to the wife for the marriage contract] ye have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good (Qu’ran An-nisa 19)



Something Important on Slavery:

<a href="http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/2006/03/slavery_in_isla.html" target="_blank">http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...ry_in_isla.html</a>

<a href="http://www.understanding-islam.com/discussions/social-issues/if-islam-wanted-to-discourage-slavery-then-why-did-the-prophet-keep-a-slave-girl" target="_blank">http://www.understanding-islam.com/discuss...ep-a-slave-girl</a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have told so many times that Muslims bought slaves from those people who were cruel and treated them harshly and even if they did not..................then the slaves were dealt mercifully,helpfully and with affection.


And I have told you so many times that owning another person is unjust, immoral and a crime against humanity. There is absolutely no justification you can give for a Muslim being allowed to own another human being like a pet or a video game console. If you believe there is justification for owning another human being I suggest you take a long hard look at yourself because you have a warped sense of morality.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Slaves weren't like pets or video games as you have quoted them.Slaves weren't those who were treated like servants or tools which were to be used at any time.You really need to re-read the entire Islamic History or I guess your memory is weak.


----------



## BlueStar (Jun 15, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> Women population in the present century is also higher than men



Again, cite please.  All figures I've seen on this says men outnumber women, which is mostly down to the huge pressure to have a male heir in the world's two most populous countries, India and China.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 15, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, men do outnumber women in some places but there are places where women outnumber men.


----------



## BlueStar (Jun 15, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> BlueStar said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Those "some places" being the two contries which have 20% and 17% of the population of the planet each (The third most populous country is the US, with 3.4%).  Even if in some 'places' (A country? A city? A building?) women outnumber men, in the place called the world, men outnumber women.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 15, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But some time in the future women will outnumber men in nearly every place.

Demographics of India:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India

Demographics of China
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_...public_of_China

Checkout the sex ratio at birth and so on.....

Here checkout Sex Ratio around the World,u will have a better view now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_ratio


----------



## BlueStar (Jun 15, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_ratio
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Based on what?  I can't see any evidence that looks like it's going to happen.  Even if it does, it will only be slight (We're certainly not going to see anything as big as 120 women for every 100 men, because of the natural corrections of the population based on Fisher's principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher%27s_principle)

The Quran might say things like humans are getting smaller and women are going to start outnumbering men, but we can see clear as day that the exact opposite is happening.  If God wrote the Quran, God's wrong.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 15, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Qur'an doesn't say anything about the humans getting smaller. And women outnumbering men is a sign of Judgment Day. Meaning, not now. And this sign is probably going to be linked with a (possible) third World War. Since there are more male soldiers, that will create gender imbalance. But this is only supposition on how it could happen. Besides, as China and India develop and become modern, they will stop killing their daughters and we will see the same trend as in every other developed country. Females outnumbering males.


----------



## BlueStar (Jun 15, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> The Qur'an doesn't say anything about the humans getting smaller.
> 
> My mistake, it's the Sahih al-Bukhari
> 
> ...


----------



## Bloodangel (Jun 15, 2011)

sounds good to me... more women than men 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




more women to go around... 2 each or maybe 3 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




... i dont mind more women than men


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 15, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The gap is surely widening in some countries but to a limited extend.In countries like India as the development and education will progress people won't mind having daughters......so the number of women in such countries is bound to grow(as pointed out by Pyrmon24).
One Hadith also states that there will a major war between two communities before Doomsday.....who knows that this might be a reason for the decrease in male population.


----------



## BlueStar (Jun 15, 2011)

Even if all prejudice against female babies is removed, you're still only going to get to about a 1:1 ratio, so you need to stop looking for signs of it occurring now and just keep hoping for the bloody war god has promised you.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 15, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> Even if all prejudice against female babies is removed, you're still only going to get to about a 1:1 ratio, so you need to stop looking for signs of it occurring now and just keep hoping for the bloody war god has promised you.



I am not waiting for any bloody war....why would I want bloodshed,human suffering and casualties.
I am a Muslim and I believe in Allah and Muhammad(S.A.W)....so whatever he said must be true..............don't forget many of his prophesies have already become a reality.We will see about that female and male ratio thing.


----------



## Tanas (Jun 15, 2011)

Some of what is said in this video has already been shown to be true in this thread, but I think the part where he says that all rapes committed in Oslo were done by Muslims is false. 
[youtube]377kKBi6anQ[/youtube]



@bsfmtl123, any chance you can tell which prophesies you're referring to?, and please try not to quote warped interpretations of Quran versus that suit your facts.


----------



## NeSchn (Jun 15, 2011)

Selim873 said:
			
		

> Here's my theory:  See you all on December 22, 2012!


I like this guy.


But personally, I have my own beliefs and I don't state them because I know it only causes trouble. But I'll just say, I don't believe any of this.


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 15, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> You can call it "misleading or play on words"  but there are certain circumstances including the consent of the first wife.
> Women population much higher than men(one reason),that is why Quran *ALLOWS*(but does not order) four marriages.
> The female population is certainly not greater than the male population. For your argument to make sense the female population would have to be 4 times that of the male population.
> 
> ...


So that makes it justified to own another human?


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 15, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> Some of what is said in this video has already been shown to be true in this thread, but I think the part where he says that all rapes committed in Oslo were done by Muslims is false.
> [youtube]377kKBi6anQ[/youtube]
> 
> 
> ...




What has been shown true in this thread?Please point out.
The prophesies I am talking about have been posted on the first page...........if you don't mind bother reading it.
I don't believe in this utter rubbish..........Islamic Cultural Terrorism......


----------



## Tanas (Jun 15, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You have shown that you agree that [censored] and slavery is acceptable and that women are inferior to men.

And these facts are not total rubbish.
Cultural Terrorism.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/03/internat...pe/03dutch.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20003151-504083.html
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=33188
Http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/s...000/2542873.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1413995/10...in-Nigeria.html
And the list goes on and on.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




I suppose that you dont agree with a sing word these woman are saying either?
[youtube]ouztv-tRPKM[/youtube]


----------



## Holified 2x (Jun 15, 2011)

Power went off on are street and radios stop working for 5 hours a couple weeks ago me and my friend thought it was the end the world ! Turn out be a car accident


----------



## Jakob95 (Jun 16, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


From this video I now want all the Muslims to live in their own countries.  Their plan right now is to concern France and then concern Europe.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 16, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I never said that [censored] is acceptable. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 and as far as slavery is concerned that has been abolished,Islam caused it.
When the whole world was lost in the wilderness of slavery,Islam gave slaves a new height and elevated their position in the society.Then slowly and gradually every city and country abolished it.  
Here have a look at it:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/equality.htm


----------



## BlueStar (Jun 16, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> BlueStar said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well he said there was going to be such a war, everything he says comes true, so there's nothing we can do about it.  It created man knowing this would happen and is complicit.  Same with the Biblical God's predictions of sin and the wrath he will carry out in revenge.


----------



## Aeter (Jun 16, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> From this video I now want all the Muslims to live in their own countries.  Their plan right now is to *concern *France and then *concern *Europe.


Yes, they are very compassionate about France and Europe.

But in all seriousness, you really think they are able to conquer France let alone Europe?
Most European countries have had it up to here with the tolerance against the muslims and right winged parties are growing all over Europe.
Didn't you here about the ban on burqas in France?


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 17, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> And these facts are not total rubbish.
> Cultural Terrorism.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/03/internat...pe/03dutch.html
> http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20003151-504083.html
> ...


I can't find a verse that promotes slavery for the life of me. Please, just give me the verse. 
I never justified anyone having slaves. I'm just saying that, at least, slaves are well treated until they are freed. And war prisoners are to be freed, as this link says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_war_in_Islam


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 17, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> You seem to not be able to make the distinction between an Arab and a Muslim. A Muslim has no right to hurt another living being. Some Arabs do not respect these obligations and are, thus, not real Muslims.
> 
> As for wife-beating, it is, again, something the Arabs and many Westerners do. They aren't necessarily Muslim. A couple of true believing Muslims would never get to the point of beating. They would simply divorce or come to an agreement.


I don't understand how you classify someone as a real Muslim. What makes your view of a Muslim any more valid than someone else's? I'm sure there are people who wouldn't classify you as being a real Muslim.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 17, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's not that difficult being a real Muslim but in today's world Muslims don't follow their Religion completely.......same goes for many Christians as well.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 17, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Real Muslims are those who do not follow the Majority. They are the ones who follow the teachings of the Qur'an and live in peacefully, both inward and outward. It is the very meaning and definition of the word Muslim.
My view of a Muslim is supported by the Qur'an. The ones who are wrong are those who would call me an apostate, as they do not follow the real teachings of the Qur'an.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 18, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> I've been on the fence about converting for a few months now. And I've regarded Islam as the best(least bad) religion for even longer. I guess that explains why you think I was Muslim. Maybe I was a Muslim deep down inside, I don't know. All I know is that I have only officially converted in the last few weeks. And to give the proper point of view of a Muslim, I had to say something about the criticism. No?
> 
> Sorry, I just don't believe you.  If I was to do a search for your name (real name and user name) would I turn up any results of you talking about Islam as being your religion dating before the beginning of this thread?  And what I meant by you refusing to criticise Islam where necessary was just that, nothing to do with you refuting my criticisms.  You have refused to criticise the Qu'ran, whereas most people who aren't Muslims who defend the Qu'ran also criticise where criticism is necessary.
> 
> ...



Verses in the Qu'ran promoting slavery :


Spoiler



Qu'ran 4:36 - Worship Allah and associate nothing with Him, and to parents do good, and to relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbor, the neighbor farther away, the companion at your side, the traveler, and those whom your right hands possess. Indeed, Allah does not like those who are self-deluding and boastful.

Qu'ran 4:92 - And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased's family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer - then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty - then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] - then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah . And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 23:6 - Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed

Qu'ran 24:31 - And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.

Qu'ran 24:58 - O you who have believed, let those whom your right hands possess and those who have not [yet] reached puberty among you ask permission of you [before entering] at three times: before the dawn prayer and when you put aside your clothing [for rest] at noon and after the night prayer. [These are] three times of privacy for you. There is no blame upon you nor upon them beyond these [periods], for they continually circulate among you - some of you, among others. Thus does Allah make clear to you the verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 33:50 - O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.

Qu'ran 33:55 - There is no blame upon women concerning their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons or their women or those their right hands possess. And fear Allah . Indeed Allah is ever, over all things, Witness.



Regardless of how well those slaves were treated the Qu'ran is a book that is supposed to be the guiding light of morals for all mankind for all time.  Why is it even saying that owning another human is acceptable?  Owning another human being is unacceptable.  Say it with me now "The Qu'ran is wrong for saying owning another human being is acceptable".  And why is the Abrahamic god telling Mohammed that it's ok to capture women during war and use them for sexual playthings?  Shouldn't a perfect, compassionate and understanding deity be saying the complete opposite?  And yes, each time you say "Well they weren't as badly treated" is justifying slavery.  You're saying "Well they couldn't have been all bad, at least they treated them ok".  When really what you should be saying is "Under no circumstances is owning a human being ok" and ending it there.  Any human being with even a grain of compassion of their mindset knows that owning a human being, regardless of circumstance or treatment, is immoral, unjust and inhumane.

Now I have the same challenge in reverse.  Show me the sections in the Qu'ran that states that owning another human being is immoral, unjust, inhumane and should never happen in any circumstances whatsoever.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 18, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3716497:date=Jun 15 2011, 10:31 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 15 2011, 10:31 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3716497"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You can call it "misleading or play on words"  but there are certain circumstances including the consent of the first wife.
Women population much higher than men(one reason),that is why Quran <b>ALLOWS</b>(but does not order) four marriages.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No, that's why it was allowed.  There is nothing in the Qu'ran that says "This is the only time this is acceptable".  Seeing as how the book claims to be "perfectly clear" then if it was only allowed in those circumstances it would state it.  All it does is suggest against it and leave it wide open to interpretation

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not the Prophet but Only Allah has the authority to change any rule in the Quran.Women population in the present century is also higher than men in some places..................Allah created every rule in the Quran for a purpose.....It might be possible that you may not be able to find any reason for it now but later u will be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No, a prophet can change the rules as well as the prophet can state that "God told me to change it".  No, the Abrahamic god didn't create every rule in the Qu'ran.  Mohammed created every rule in the Qu'ran, he just claimed to be speaking for the Abrahamic god.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Worldly needs and desires have crept in to their daily lives.Out of hundred only 5 or 4 Muslims can be true followers(I am talking about the present century).People have made sects for their own reliability and remember that every Muslim is not a Sunni or a Shia.Muslims are fighting with each other,hostilities,ignorance........If Muslims are not following Islam in true letters spirit then how can anyone judge Islam according to them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And how can you be sure that you are following Islam in it's true spirit?  To follow Islam in it's true spirit you must following what Mohammed and his companions taught.  Are you following everything that they taught or are you superimposing your own morality code on top of Islam to come up with your own version?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yes but there are some bodily and physical differences between them.For example:Women have big breasts but men don't.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, but there aren't many women that would actually want to wander around in public with their tits hanging out.  Men are allowed to bare their stomachs (Mohammed himself rode around topless), are women allowed to show their stomachs?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Can you please explain the concept of Abrahamic God?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Abrahamic god is the one you follow.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If God appeares before you.......it means that He existed then don't you think that He would have far more knowledge and power than you do.He is he One Who created a small cell to big planets such as earth which obviously you can't do.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I couldn't give a toss whether he has far more knowledge and power than me, his morals are inferior to mine therefore he is deserving of criticism.  For a being that claims he is perfect, compassionate and all-knowing he should really known better than to teach some of the things he taught.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Which evidence?Please do post them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Some evidence that Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran :



Spoiler



Qu'ran 2:108 - "Or do you intend to ask your Messenger as Moses was asked before? And whoever exchanges faith for disbelief has certainly strayed from the soundness of the way."  - This is Mohammed declaring that anyone who questions him is an unbeliever, stopping any effective criticism or questioning.  It is a tactic used by alot of totalitarian rules.  Hitler's was "Anyone who questions the party is a traitor".

Qu'ran 3:118 - "O you who have believed, do not take as intimates those other than yourselves, for they will not spare you [any] ruin. They wish you would have hardship. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater. We have certainly made clear to you the signs, if you will use reason." - This is Mohammed telling Muslims not to associate with non-Muslims.  He knew that if he made a mistake in what he was saying then people would be able to find out.  However if they listen solely to Mohammed, his companions and that which Islam teaches nobody will ever know any different.  Another tactic commonly used in a dictatorship.  See China, North Korea, USSR, Nazi Germany and many other totalitarian regimes for examples of this.

Qu'ran 5:101 - "O you who have believed, do not ask about things which, if they are shown to you, will distress you. But if you ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be shown to you. Allah has pardoned that which is past; and Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing." - Another example of Mohammed telling people not to ask questions.  In other words he was scared they would ask him something that he couldn't answer and make people realise he was making it all up.

Qu'ran 2:106 - "We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?" - This is Mohammed's "Get out of jail" free clause.  In other words if he forgets or contradicts something then it wasn't him forgetting, it was God changing it.  Only someone who was making it up as he went along would need this.

Qu'ran 5:92 - "And obey Allah and obey the Messenger and beware. And if you turn away - then know that upon Our Messenger is only [the responsibility for] clear notification." - There are lots of verses in the Qu'ran telling people to obey Mohammed, and not doing so is a grievous sin.  Why is the Qu'ran telling people to obey Mohammed without question, should it only be God that people obey?  And what better way for a ruler to have ultimate control without question from his people.  To question a ruler is treasonous, but to question God is blasphemous.  The North Koreans use a similar premise for Kim Il Jong.

Qu'ran 33:50 - "O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful." - A rule laid out specifically for Mohammed, one that allows him to have sex with any Muslim woman who wants to give herself to him.  There's quite a few examples like this in the Qu'ran that show an incredible amount of favouritism towards Mohammed.

Qu'ran 33:53 - "O you who have believed, do not enter the houses of the Prophet except when you are permitted for a meal, without awaiting its readiness. But when you are invited, then enter; and when you have eaten, disperse without seeking to remain for conversation. Indeed, that [behavior] was troubling the Prophet, and he is shy of [dismissing] you. But Allah is not shy of the truth. And when you ask [his wives] for something, ask them from behind a partition. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts. And it is not [conceivable or lawful] for you to harm the Messenger of Allah or to marry his wives after him, ever. Indeed, that would be in the sight of Allah an enormity." - Another verse telling people not to converse with Mohammed.  This verse was also "miraculously" sent down at a time when Mohammed was beginning to become annoyed with people questioning him.  The only reason he would not want people questioning him is if he had something to hide and was worried about being caught out.  Surely anyone who was speaking for God would have no problems answering all the questions that humanity could throw at him.  It's also another rule specifically for Mohammed which declares that no-one may marry his wives after he dies.  Was he worried that information might slip pointing towards the fact that he was making it all up as he went along?

Qu'ran 8:41 - "And know that anything you obtain of war booty - then indeed, for Allah is one fifth of it and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and the orphans, the needy, and the [stranded] traveler, if you have believed in Allah and in that which We sent down to Our Servant on the day of criterion - the day when the two armies met. And Allah , over all things, is competent." - Mohammed gets the greater share of war booty.  And why would God (a being supposedly beyond our comprehension, free from the trappings of Earthly desires and a being who could create anything he wants) need war booty?  In otherwords, the war booty is for Mohammed but it sounds better if it's for God.

Qu'ran 33:30 - "O wives of the Prophet, whoever of you should commit a clear immorality - for her the punishment would be doubled two fold, and ever is that, for Allah , easy." - Mohammeds wives get double punishment for misbehaving.

Qu'ran 16:101 - "And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse - and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down - they say, "You, [O Muhammad], are but an inventor [of lies]." But most of them do not know." - Mohammed gets caught out making it all up so God sends down a verse to back him up.  This goes hand in hand with the abrogation verse.

Qu'ran 18:86 - "Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it [as if] setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people. Allah said, "O Dhul-Qarnayn, either you punish [them] or else adopt among them [a way of] goodness.""  - The sun does not set in a spring of dark mud nor does it appear like it sets in a spring of dark mud.

Qu'ran 21:33 - "And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all [heavenly bodies] in an orbit are swimming." - The Sun does not swim along in an orbit.  However this does hold up with the average thought back then that the Earth was the centre of the universe and that the Sun and the Moon orbited us rather than us orbiting the Sun.

Qu'ran 36:38 - "And the sun runs [on course] toward its stopping point. That is the determination of the Exalted in Might, the Knowing." - The Sun is stationary and does not go towards a stopping place.

Qu'ran 36:40 - "It is not allowable for the sun to reach the moon, nor does the night overtake the day, but each, in an orbit, is swimming." - Evidence that in the above verses it's talking about the Sun orbiting the Earth, and that Mohammed believed that the Sun and the Moon followed the same orbital trajectory.

Qu'ran 23:14 - "Then We made the sperm-drop into a clinging clot, and We made the clot into a lump [of flesh], and We made [from] the lump, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh; then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allah , the best of creators."  - This is not how an embryo is formed at all.  At no point are we a "clinging clot".  Also flesh does not come after bone during the formation of a foetus, it happens all at the same time.

Qu'ran 86:6-7 - "He was created from a fluid, ejected, Emerging from between the backbone and the ribs." - That's not where sperm comes from, it is however where ancient Greek scientists and philosophers thought it came from.

Qu'ran 67:5 - "And We have certainly beautified the nearest heaven with stars and have made [from] them what is thrown at the devils and have prepared for them the punishment of the Blaze." - In reality there's no such thing as "shooting stars", stars are stationary.

Qu'ran 67:19 - "Do they not see the birds above them with wings outspread and [sometimes] folded in? None holds them [aloft] except the Most Merciful. Indeed He is, of all things, Seeing." - There is a scientific reason why birds can fly.  It's not God holding them aloft. <a href="http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceSupp/Activities/Flight/Overview/FlyLesson3.htm" target="_blank">http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceS.../FlyLesson3.htm</a>

Qu'ran 2:222 - "They will ask you about menstruation. Say, 'It is harmful, so keep away from women during it. Do not approach them until they are purified of it, when they are purified you may approach them as Allah has ordained." - Menstruation is not harmful, it's perfectly normal and natural.  There is a scientific reason for it.

There's more stuff in the Qu'ran itself that I could go on about if you like?
--------------------------------------------------
It gets many things wrong about Christianity.  Christians don't worship Jesus and Mary in place of or along with God, and not all Christians follow the teaching of the Trinity.  It also declares that Jesus can not be the son of God because God can not have children, yet it also states that God is capable of all things.

It mentions there are corruptions in the Jewish scriptures.  The Dead Sea Scrolls prove otherwise.

Originally Mohammed thought declaring himself a prophet of the Abrahamic god would make Jews and Christians follow him.  When they did not do this he declared them unbelievers and began preaching hatred towards them.

Mohammeds original message was one of peace, tolerance and acceptance.  This completely changed when he built up enough followers to allow him to begin conquest.

The Qu'ran claims the Earth was created for us and that the animal kingdom and humans were created at the same time.  So what about the dinosaurs?

The Qu'ran claims that Adam and Eve were the first humans.  However it doesn't mention what type of human they were.  Were they Neanderthals?  If they weren't Neanderthals then where did the Neanderthals come from?

The Qu'ran claims that God is compassionate, yet he allows one human the right to own another human.

The Qu'ran claims that God knows everything you'll do from the moment of birth to the moment of death, yet at the same time claims that life is a test.  If God knows the answer already why does he need to test us?

The Qu'ran claims that God is compassionate.  However God also makes people unbelievers and sends them to hell.  If he's compassionate and he knows that disbelief will send you to hell for an eternity of torture why is making people disbelievers?

The Qu'ran talks about boiling water to use as a means of torture but makes no mention whatsoever of how useful it is to boil water for hygienes sake.

The Qu'ran claims that stars adorn the lowest heaven and that the Moon is in their midst.  There is only one star in our solar system.  However to the naked eye it does appear the way Mohammed described it.

Mohammed forced Zayd to divorce his wife and then married her himself claiming it to be "Gods will".  Another example of Mohammed being greedy and lustful.

Mohammed married a 6 yr old girl and consummated the relationship when she was 9.  Yes this was acceptable at the time, but if he truly was an example for "all mankind for all time" then it's something he should not have done.  And surely an all knowing God would have known this isn't acceptable behaviour.
-------------------------------------------
There's loads more I could put in but I would be here all day, and I think there's plenty here to start off with.  If you like I could type it all up in a document with more detailed explanation of each point.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is what you believe that Muhammad(S.A.W) had developed the Quran(By a person who could neither write nor read anything)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Was he also deaf and mute?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you are asking about those verses asking believers to kill the infidels and so on then you should have a look that what happens when people just twist verses out of context and present them as a sign of violence in the Quran.
<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060914001306AA3aptj" target="_blank">http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14001306AA3aptj</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That's not what I'm referring to at all.  What I asked was "What does the Qu'ran say about the treatment of slaves who aren't Muslim".

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slapped for what....do you have the right to slap me???<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No I don't have the right to slap, but it would be my moral duty to do it.  I would slap you for placing the blame of a man attacking a woman on the man's wife.  It would be the man's fault, nobody elses.  A good man wouldn't attack a woman regardless of circumstances, and a moral person definitely wouldn't lay the blame on anyone but the attackers.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If a man is married to a women and he provides her everything of which she is in need of.He treats her with respect.kindness and love still then if the women refuses to comply with her husband...........what if the men refused to have sex with his wife.....how would you view it now.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I wouldn't care if a man gave his wife the Earth on a platter of gold and jewels, she still has the right to refuse sex.  And what if the man refused to have sex with his wife?  It would be his right just as it's the woman's right to say no.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As far as sex with slave girls is concerned here is what the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad  say to those who by force have sex with their wives and slave girls:



Spoiler



Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29

Narrated Al-Ma'rur: At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names."  The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.



None of that mentions anything to do with forced sex with a slave.  It talks about how a Muslim should treat a slave who is Muslim.  What it really should be saying is that the slave owner should be setting the slave free, anything else is immoral, unjust and inhumane.



Spoiler



Saheeh Muslim

Book 015, Number 4082:

Hilal b. Yasaf reported that a person got angry and slapped his slave-girl. Thereupon Suwaid b. Muqarrin said to him: You could find no other part (to slap) but the prominent part of her face. See I was one of the seven sons of Muqarrin, and we had but only one slave-girl. The youngest of us slapped her, and Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) commanded us to set her free.



Again, it doesn't mention anything about forced sex being wrong.  It mentions a slave being set free as punishment for their master hitting them in the face.  The Qu'ran already mentions that hitting a woman in the face isn't allowed so therefore the slave owner is being punished for breaking this rule, the punishment is the loss of a slave.  Also ask yourself, why is the slave only being freed as punishment for the slaves master, why is the slave not being set free because it's wrong for a human to own another human?



Spoiler



Book 015, Number 4086

Abu Mas'ud al-Badri reported: "I was beating my slave with a whip when I heard a voice behind me: Understand, Abu Masud; but I did not recognise the voice due to intense anger. He (Abu Mas'ud) reported: As he came near me (I found) that he was the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and he was saying: Bear in mind, Abu Mas'ud; bear in mind. Abu Mas'ud. He (Aba Maslad) said: threw the whip from my hand. Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Bear in mind, Abu Mas'ud; verily Allah has more dominance upon you than you have upon your slave. I (then) said: I would never beat my servant in future.



Again this mentions nothing about forced sex with a slave.



Spoiler



O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower [money given by the husband to the wife for the marriage contract] ye have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good (Qu’ran An-nisa 19)



And again, this mentions nothing about sex with slaves.  In fact this verse isn't even referring to slaves at all.  See the spoiler for an explanation from a tafsir :



Spoiler



(O ye who believe! It is not lawful for you forcibly to inherit the women (of your deceased kinsmen)…) [4:19]. Abu Bakr al-Asfahani informed us> ‘Abd Allah ibn Muhammad al-Asfahani> Abu Yahya> Sahl ibn ‘Uthman> Asbat ibn Muhammad> al-Shaybani> ‘Ikrimah> Ibn ‘Abbas (Abu Ishaq al-Shaybani mentioned that ‘Ata’ ibn al-Husayn al-Suwa‘i also related this tradition, and I do not think he related it from other than Ibn ‘Abbas) who said regarding the verse (O ye who believe! It is not lawful for you forcibly to inherit the women (of your deceased kinsmen): “It was the habit that, when a man died, his heirs had a better right to his wife, if one of them wished he would marry her, if not they married her off to somebody else or, alternately, leave her unmarried, for they had a better right to her than her own family. This verse was revealed about this issue”. This was related by Bukhari in the chapter on Tafsir from Muhammad ibn Muqatil and he also related it in the chapter on Coercion from Husayn ibn Mansur and both his narrators related it from Asbat. The commentators of the Qur’an said: “In the pre-Islamic and beginning of the Islamic eras, if a man died and was survived by his wife, it was the custom that his son from another wife or his relative from his clan would come and throw his cloak on that woman, and this gesture entailed that he had a better right over her than she had on her own person or that anyone else had on her. If he then wished to marry her, he married her without giving her any dowry, except for the dowry which was given to her by her deceased husband. Alternately, he could marry her to someone else and take all her dowry, giving her nothing in exchange. Or, he could leave her unmarried to hurt her so that she would buy herself from him in exchange for what she inherited from her deceased husband, or wait until she died so that he inherits her. When Abu Qays ibn al-Aslat al-Ansari died, he was survived by his wife Kubayshah bint Ma‘an al-Ansariyyah. One of his sons, from another wife, by the name of Hisn (Muqatil stated that his name was Qays ibn Abi Qays) placed his cloak on her and, thus, inherited the right to her marriage.



So as you can see it had nothing at all to do with slaves or slavery.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Something Important on Slavery:

<a href="http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/2006/03/slavery_in_isla.html" target="_blank">http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...ry_in_isla.html</a>

<a href="http://www.understanding-islam.com/discussions/social-issues/if-islam-wanted-to-discourage-slavery-then-why-did-the-prophet-keep-a-slave-girl" target="_blank">http://www.understanding-islam.com/discuss...ep-a-slave-girl</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Something more important about slavery - it's unjust, immoral and inhumane.  A human is not a commodity to be sold, bought and owned.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slaves weren't like pets or video games as you have quoted them.Slaves weren't those who were treated like servants or tools which were to be used at any time.You really need to re-read the entire Islamic History or I guess your memory is weak.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Why do I need to re-read the entire Islamic history?  What exactly am I missing here, please do explain.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 18, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sorry, I just don't believe you.  If I was to do a search for your name (real name and user name) would I turn up any results of you talking about Islam as being your religion dating before the beginning of this thread?  And what I meant by you refusing to criticise Islam where necessary was just that, nothing to do with you refuting my criticisms.  You have refused to criticise the Qu'ran, whereas most people who aren't Muslims who defend the Qu'ran also criticise where criticism is necessary.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll do that for you. I tried searching my name and username on Google, ringing up a total of three results, one of which have a connection to me, but not to Islam. The second is some french video game forum. The third is a(closed) YouTube account I'm not sure about. I don't think I ever had a YouTube account, but I guess it's still possible. You could also look up my username(old one, as my new one is, well, new) and Islam. I did and it mostly points to this thread, the "What's your religion" thread and that closed YouTube account. As I said, I newly converted. Whether you believe me or not I could care less as it really changes nothing.
Can you be clearer about that whole criticism thing? I'm not sure I understand as English isn't my native language.


<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Nowhere in the Sura does it say "This is only acceptable if...".  At best it advises against, at worst it's a tenuous contradiction.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It says it is ok to marry other wives to help orphans and that if a man can't treat them equally, he shall only have one(4:3). Then 4:129 comes along and says: Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). Thus prohibiting polygamy. It isn't directly banned it because it could still be useful if the male population got critically low again in the future.

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm afraid that's not possible.  Whether you follow them or not or whether you believe they are part of Islam or not is irrelevant.  They are a valid source of Islamic history.  They also show the true face of Mohammed, who is supposed to be "the example for all mankind".  They also show what the true meanings of verses were along with the Tafsir written closer to the time of Mohammed.  If you're going to go by the logic that you don't accept them because they were written by mankind a couple of hundred years after the Qu'ran then the same would also hold true of the Qu'ran that you use.  <b>The Qu'ran you use was compiled and scribed by Uthman, a couple of hundred years after the death of Mohammed</b>.  Before you go on about the whole "God promised to keep it protected" remember that argument holds no weight whatsoever unless you can prove the existence of the Abrahamic god or you can show me a copy of the Qu'ran from pre-Uthman era that looks exactly like the Qu'ran you use today.  Otherwise it's not really any different than saying "Santa Clause promised to keep the Qu'ran free from change".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
`Uthman ibn `Affan (Arabic: عثمان بن عفان‎) <b>(c. 579 – 17 July 656)</b>
Wrong Uthman, mate. The compilation started 19 years after Muhammad's death.
I don't care what is written in the Hadith. I have all of my religious teachings coming from the Qur'an. They are useless in a religion debate as they are not a religious text. If you try to use the Hadith, I'll simply ignore it. It holds no weight whatsoever. 

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Verses in the Qu'ran promoting slavery :


Spoiler



Qu'ran 4:36 - Worship Allah and associate nothing with Him, and to parents do good, and to relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbor, the neighbor farther away, the companion at your side, the traveler, and those whom your right hands possess. Indeed, Allah does not like those who are self-deluding and boastful.

Qu'ran 4:92 - And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased's family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer - then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty - then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] - then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah . And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 23:6 - Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed

Qu'ran 24:31 - And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.

Qu'ran 24:58 - O you who have believed, let those whom your right hands possess and those who have not [yet] reached puberty among you ask permission of you [before entering] at three times: before the dawn prayer and when you put aside your clothing [for rest] at noon and after the night prayer. [These are] three times of privacy for you. There is no blame upon you nor upon them beyond these [periods], for they continually circulate among you - some of you, among others. Thus does Allah make clear to you the verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 33:50 - O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.

Qu'ran 33:55 - There is no blame upon women concerning their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons or their women or those their right hands possess. And fear Allah . Indeed Allah is ever, over all things, Witness.



Regardless of how well those slaves were treated the Qu'ran is a book that is supposed to be the guiding light of morals for all mankind for all time.  Why is it even saying that owning another human is acceptable?  Owning another human being is unacceptable.  Say it with me now "The Qu'ran is wrong for saying owning another human being is acceptable".  And why is the Abrahamic god telling Mohammed that it's ok to capture women during war and use them for sexual playthings?  Shouldn't a perfect, compassionate and understanding deity be saying the complete opposite?  And yes, each time you say "Well they weren't as badly treated" is justifying slavery.  You're saying "Well they couldn't have been all bad, at least they treated them ok".  When really what you should be saying is "Under no circumstances is owning a human being ok" and ending it there.  Any human being with even a grain of compassion of their mindset knows that owning a human being, regardless of circumstance or treatment, is immoral, unjust and inhumane.

Now I have the same challenge in reverse.  Show me the sections in the Qu'ran that states that owning another human being is immoral, unjust, inhumane and should never happen in any circumstances whatsoever.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't see any promoting here. I don't see the Quran saying it's acceptable either. All I see are verses that say to free your slaves at every occasion, if you have any. And if you do have any because you newly converted and lived in a country were it is socially acceptable to own another human being, you must free them and help get into society by giving them money(Zakat). While you are in the process of freeing your slaves, you must treat them as if they were free men. Oh and Ma Malakat Aymanukum(those your right hand possess) can have different meanings other than slave.
Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.


----------



## Ace Overclocked (Jun 18, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3723354:date=Jun 18 2011, 05:06 PM:name=Pyrmon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pyrmon @ Jun 18 2011, 05:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3723354"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sorry, I just don't believe you.  If I was to do a search for your name (real name and user name) would I turn up any results of you talking about Islam as being your religion dating before the beginning of this thread?  And what I meant by you refusing to criticise Islam where necessary was just that, nothing to do with you refuting my criticisms.  You have refused to criticise the Qu'ran, whereas most people who aren't Muslims who defend the Qu'ran also criticise where criticism is necessary.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll do that for you. I tried searching my name and username on Google, ringing up a total of three results, one of which have a connection to me, but not to Islam. The second is some french video game forum. The third is a(closed) YouTube account I'm not sure about. I don't think I ever had a YouTube account, but I guess it's still possible. You could also look up my username(old one, as my new one is, well, new) and Islam. I did and it mostly points to this thread, the "What's your religion" thread and that closed YouTube account. As I said, I newly converted. Whether you believe me or not I could care less as it really changes nothing.
Can you be clearer about that whole criticism thing? I'm not sure I understand as English isn't my native language.


<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Nowhere in the Sura does it say "This is only acceptable if...".  At best it advises against, at worst it's a tenuous contradiction.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It says it is ok to marry other wives to help orphans and that if a man can't treat them equally, he shall only have one(4:3). Then 4:129 comes along and says: Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). Thus prohibiting polygamy. It isn't directly banned it because it could still be useful if the male population got critically low again in the future.

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm afraid that's not possible.  Whether you follow them or not or whether you believe they are part of Islam or not is irrelevant.  They are a valid source of Islamic history.  They also show the true face of Mohammed, who is supposed to be "the example for all mankind".  They also show what the true meanings of verses were along with the Tafsir written closer to the time of Mohammed.  If you're going to go by the logic that you don't accept them because they were written by mankind a couple of hundred years after the Qu'ran then the same would also hold true of the Qu'ran that you use.  <b>The Qu'ran you use was compiled and scribed by Uthman, a couple of hundred years after the death of Mohammed</b>.  Before you go on about the whole "God promised to keep it protected" remember that argument holds no weight whatsoever unless you can prove the existence of the Abrahamic god or you can show me a copy of the Qu'ran from pre-Uthman era that looks exactly like the Qu'ran you use today.  Otherwise it's not really any different than saying "Santa Clause promised to keep the Qu'ran free from change".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
`Uthman ibn `Affan (Arabic: عثمان بن عفان‎) <b>(c. 579 – 17 July 656)</b>
Wrong Uthman, mate. The compilation started 19 years after Muhammad's death.
I don't care what is written in the Hadith. I have all of my religious teachings coming from the Qur'an. They are useless in a religion debate as they are not a religious text. If you try to use the Hadith, I'll simply ignore it. It holds no weight whatsoever. 

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Verses in the Qu'ran promoting slavery :


Spoiler



Qu'ran 4:36 - Worship Allah and associate nothing with Him, and to parents do good, and to relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbor, the neighbor farther away, the companion at your side, the traveler, and those whom your right hands possess. Indeed, Allah does not like those who are self-deluding and boastful.

Qu'ran 4:92 - And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased's family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer - then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty - then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] - then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah . And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 23:6 - Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed

Qu'ran 24:31 - And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.

Qu'ran 24:58 - O you who have believed, let those whom your right hands possess and those who have not [yet] reached puberty among you ask permission of you [before entering] at three times: before the dawn prayer and when you put aside your clothing [for rest] at noon and after the night prayer. [These are] three times of privacy for you. There is no blame upon you nor upon them beyond these [periods], for they continually circulate among you - some of you, among others. Thus does Allah make clear to you the verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 33:50 - O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.

Qu'ran 33:55 - There is no blame upon women concerning their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons or their women or those their right hands possess. And fear Allah . Indeed Allah is ever, over all things, Witness.



Regardless of how well those slaves were treated the Qu'ran is a book that is supposed to be the guiding light of morals for all mankind for all time.  Why is it even saying that owning another human is acceptable?  Owning another human being is unacceptable.  Say it with me now "The Qu'ran is wrong for saying owning another human being is acceptable".  And why is the Abrahamic god telling Mohammed that it's ok to capture women during war and use them for sexual playthings?  Shouldn't a perfect, compassionate and understanding deity be saying the complete opposite?  And yes, each time you say "Well they weren't as badly treated" is justifying slavery.  You're saying "Well they couldn't have been all bad, at least they treated them ok".  When really what you should be saying is "Under no circumstances is owning a human being ok" and ending it there.  Any human being with even a grain of compassion of their mindset knows that owning a human being, regardless of circumstance or treatment, is immoral, unjust and inhumane.

Now I have the same challenge in reverse.  Show me the sections in the Qu'ran that states that owning another human being is immoral, unjust, inhumane and should never happen in any circumstances whatsoever.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't see any promoting here. I don't see the Quran saying it's acceptable either. All I see are verses that say to free your slaves at every occasion, if you have any. And if you do have any because you newly converted and lived in a country were it is socially acceptable to own another human being, you must free them and help get into society by giving them money(Zakat). While you are in the process of freeing your slaves, you must treat them as if they were free men. Oh and Ma Malakat Aymanukum(those your right hand possess) can have different meanings other than slave.
Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i agree on most of this


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 18, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> Real Muslims are those who do not follow the Majority. They are the ones who follow the teachings of the Qur'an and live in peacefully, both inward and outward. It is the very meaning and definition of the word Muslim.
> My view of a Muslim is supported by the Qur'an. The ones who are wrong are those who would call me an apostate, as they do not follow the real teachings of the Qur'an.


Religious text do not have a correct interpretation. People have a tendency to project their personal views on a religious text. It is easy to make a religious book say almost anything you want it to depending on how you choose to interpret it. I don't think it is good to have a mentality to view everyone who disagrees with your view about Muslims as wrong. I guarantee you that the people you think are wrong are going to have the same mentality about you.

I have to compliment you on your English. I would never have guessed it isn't your native language.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 18, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The thing is, my definition of a Muslim is the definition of the very word Muslim. Even if you don't take into account the Qur'an, the word Islam means inner and outer peace achieved by the submission of your will to the One true God. That one word represents this concept. A Muslim is one who achieves said inner and outer peace by the submission of his will to the one true God. It's what the very word means. It is the universally accepted definition of Muslim. Anyone who does not abide by these criteria isn't Muslim. Any "Muslim" who hurts another hasn't achieved outer peace, so isn't a true Muslim. A "Muslim" who does good deeds for the bad reasons or thinks bad things(like that he is superior to others) hasn't achieved inner piece, so isn't Muslim. In the same way that anyone who achieved inner and outer peace but didn't submit his will to the one true God isn't Muslim.
Those who think I am wrong about this definition are the ones who promote violence, hatred and ignorance. They are the ones who are wrong.

Thanks for the compliment. I'm still working on my English though. Mostly orally. Funny thing is that I live in an completely French environment and learned English from playing Pokemon and Zelda.


----------



## Magmorph (Jun 18, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> The thing is, my definition of a Muslim is the definition of the very word Muslim. Even if you don't take into account the Qur'an, the word Islam means inner and outer peace achieved by the submission of your will to the One true God. That one word represents this concept. A Muslim is one who achieves said inner and outer peace by the submission of his will to the one true God. It's what the very word means. It is the universally accepted definition of Muslim. Anyone who does not abide by these criteria isn't Muslim. Any "Muslim" who hurts another hasn't achieved outer peace, so isn't a true Muslim. A "Muslim" who does good deeds for the bad reasons or thinks bad things(like that he is superior to others) hasn't achieved inner piece, so isn't Muslim. In the same way that anyone who achieved inner and outer peace but didn't submit his will to the one true God isn't Muslim.
> Those who think I am wrong about this definition are the ones who promote violence, hatred and ignorance. They are the ones who are wrong.
> 
> Thanks for the compliment. I'm still working on my English though. Mostly orally. Funny thing is that I live in an completely French environment and learned English from playing Pokemon and Zelda.


The word Muslim is generally used to describe someone who adheres to the religion. I could take a literal meaning of the word Christian(Christ like) and apply it to someone who does not follow the religion of Christianity but it is generally accepted that when you call someone a Christian or a Muslim it is because of their religion. Things like inner and outer peace are not very objective terms and they leave the definition of the word open to interpretation. Not everyone has the same definition of what is peaceful and what is not. Religions leave too much open for interpretation. I can see your beliefs differ greatly from those of bsfmtl123, but you both call yourselves Muslim. How do you come to the conclusion that your beliefs are correct?


----------



## Maz7006 (Jun 18, 2011)

in my life time, i've seen Muslims kill Muslims, and Christians kill Christians, and whatever killing whatever, i've been through a lot of crap that made me question my religious values which i think i have just given up on now.

i dnt believe in signs of judgement day; i'd rather think of the causes that will lead up to it (if this judgement day ever exists that is)



			
				Pyrmon said:
			
		

> The thing is, my definition of a Muslim is the definition of the very word Muslim. Even if you don't take into account the Qur'an, the word Islam means inner and outer peace achieved by the submission of your will to the One true God. That one word represents this concept. A Muslim is one who achieves said inner and outer peace by the submission of his will to the one true God. It's what the very word means. It is the universally accepted definition of Muslim. Anyone who does not abide by these criteria isn't Muslim. Any "Muslim" who hurts another hasn't achieved outer peace, so isn't a true Muslim. A "Muslim" who does good deeds for the bad reasons or thinks bad things(like that he is superior to others) hasn't achieved inner piece, so isn't Muslim. In the same way that anyone who achieved inner and outer peace but didn't submit his will to the one true God isn't Muslim.
> Those who think I am wrong about this definition are the ones who promote violence, hatred and ignorance. They are the ones who are wrong.



i remember back in the day, once at a friday prayer, a shaikh was talking about this. Although it is valid what you are saying, submitting yourself to god is not enough . You see muslims these days pray and what not, but wont hesitate to lie, steal or kill. I don;t believe in much these days, but regardless simply just believing in god and submitting yourself to him is not enough


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 19, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> I'll do that for you. I tried searching my name and username on Google, ringing up a total of three results, one of which have a connection to me, but not to Islam. The second is some french video game forum. The third is a(closed) YouTube account I'm not sure about. I don't think I ever had a YouTube account, but I guess it's still possible. You could also look up my username(old one, as my new one is, well, new) and Islam. I did and it mostly points to this thread, the "What's your religion" thread and that closed YouTube account. As I said, I newly converted. Whether you believe me or not I could care less as it really changes nothing.
> Can you be clearer about that whole criticism thing? I'm not sure I understand as English isn't my native language.
> 
> I'll leave it at that, but I don't believe for one second you converted after this thread was opened.
> ...



The Qu'ran clearly states that captive women are lawful for sex.



Spoiler



Quran 33:50 - "O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful."


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 19, 2011)

<b>First Half:</b>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You can call it "misleading or play on words" but there are certain circumstances including the consent of the first wife.
Women population much higher than men(one reason),that is why Quran ALLOWS(but does not order) four marriages.

No, that's why it was allowed. There is nothing in the Qu'ran that says "This is the only time this is acceptable". Seeing as how the book claims to be "perfectly clear" then if it was only allowed in those circumstances it would state it. All it does is suggest against it and leave it wide open to interpretation<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

NOTEolygamy was common in Arabia and other civilizations.Islam did not initiate polygamy but in fact restricted the number of wives a man could marry.

Women population was much higher than men when it was allowed.The verses which allowed polygamy were revealed after the Battle of Uhud in which many Muslims were killed,leaving widows and orphans for whom due care was incumbent upon the Muslim survivors.The Quran says,

"Marry women of your choice two or three or four;but if you fear that you shall not be
able to deal justly(with them),then only one or (a captive) that your right hands possess.
That will be more suitable to prevent you doing injustice."(4:3) 

It is to be noted that polygamy is neither mandatory,nor encouraged but merely permitted.Permission to practice polygamy is not associated with mere satisfaction of passion.It is rather associated with compassion toward widows and orphans,<b>a matter that is confirmed by atmosphere in which the verse was revealed.</b>
Dealing justly with one's wives is an obligation.This applies to housing,food,clothing,kind treatment.....etc..,for which the husband is completely responsible.If one is not sure of being able to deal justly with them,the Quran says,

"Then (marry) only one."(4:3)

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not the Prophet but Only Allah has the authority to change any rule in the Quran.Women population in the present century is also higher than men in some places..................Allah created every rule in the Quran for a purpose.....It might be possible that you may not be able to find any reason for it now but later u will be.


No, a prophet can change the rules as well as the prophet can state that "God told me to change it". No, the Abrahamic god didn't create every rule in the Qu'ran. Mohammed created every rule in the Qu'ran, he just claimed to be speaking for the Abrahamic god.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No a Prophet cannot change any rule according to his will.This is what you believe about Muhammad(S.A.W) but the Quran itself states,
"Nor does he say anything of his own desire.It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him."(Surah An-Najm)

Was Muhammad(S.A.W) a liar (NO):
<a href="http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/168/" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/168/" target="_blank">http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/168/</a></a>

Or 

Was Muhammad(S.A.W) a Insane, a Poet, or a Sorcerer (NO):
<a href="http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/167/" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/167/" target="_blank">http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/167/</a></a>

Or refer to this:
<a href="http://www.thewaytotruth.org/theholyquran/wordofgod.html" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.thewaytotruth.org/theholyquran/wordofgod.html" target="_blank">http://www.thewaytotruth.org/theholyquran/wordofgod.html</a></a>


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Worldly needs and desires have crept in to their daily lives.Out of hundred only 5 or 4 Muslims can be true followers(I am talking about the present century).People have made sects for their own reliability and remember that every Muslim is not a Sunni or a Shia.Muslims are fighting with each other,hostilities,ignorance........If Muslims are not following Islam in true letters spirit then how can anyone judge Islam according to them.


And how can you be sure that you are following Islam in it's true spirit? To follow Islam in it's true spirit you must following what Mohammed and his companions taught. Are you following everything that they taught or are you superimposing your own morality code on top of Islam to come up with your own version?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

By following the Quran and the example of the Holy Prophet(S.A.W).I follow the Holy Prophet(S.A.W) in not every aspect because it's not possible to cover every aspect at the age of 16 but as far as my knowledge exceeds I always follow his example.No, never! i always stay on to the pure Islamic principals not any other teachings(ex: shia).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yes but there are some bodily and physical differences between them.For example:Women have big breasts but men don't.


Ok, but there aren't many women that would actually want to wander around in public with their tits hanging out. Men are allowed to bare their stomachs (Mohammed himself rode around topless), are women allowed to show their stomachs?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

When and where did Muhammad(S.A.W) rode topless?Please quote any verse which says men are allowed to bare their stomachs.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Can you please explain the concept of Abrahamic God?


The Abrahamic god is the one you follow.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The One which I follow is Allah(the One and Only).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is what you believe that Muhammad(S.A.W) had developed the Quran(By a person who could neither write nor read anything)


Was he also deaf and mute?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Of course not.

Prophet Muhammad was an illiterate man who had no formal education in any science, language, religious or secular.

Quran speaks about a variety of branches of science like: Astronomy, Embryology, Hydrology, Geology, Sociology, Psychology, Oceanography, Law etc. including lots of scientific statements that were validated only recently and were not known in the time of the prophet.

It was not known about prophet Muhammad any scholarly tendencies or achievements until the age of forty (when he received the first verses of Quran). So, how this illiterate man suddenly brings about a book like the Quran including an ideological and religious revolution that changed history?

Why prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), if he authored the Quran, honor the virgin Mary (May Allah be pleased with her), the mother of Jesus (peace be on him) as the best woman over all women on earth over all ages until day of judgment (an honor that even not offered by the bible) while not mentioning his own family members with a single word and even not mentioning any name of them.?

If he had authored the Quran, why he didn't claim this authorship of Quran and consequently gaining higher prestige among his followers who may consider him as a God.

Why he mentioned Quran verses that reprimand him (as that of chapter 33, verse 37 and chapter 80 verses 1-3) if he wrote Quran by himself?.

Source:http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_Quran_the_true_word_of_God

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you are asking about those verses asking believers to kill the infidels and so on then you should have a look that what happens when people just twist verses out of context and present them as a sign of violence in the Quran.
<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14001306AA3aptj" target="_blank"><a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14001306AA3aptj" target="_blank">http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14001306AA3aptj</a></a>


That's not what I'm referring to at all. What I asked was "What does the Qu'ran say about the treatment of slaves who aren't Muslim".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

There treatment is the same as treatment of Non-Muslims(who aren't slaves).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slapped for what....do you have the right to slap me???


No I don't have the right to slap, but it would be my moral duty to do it. I would slap you for placing the blame of a man attacking a woman on the man's wife. It would be the man's fault, nobody elses. A good man wouldn't attack a woman regardless of circumstances, and a moral person definitely wouldn't lay the blame on anyone but the attackers.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't understand what are you trying to say....please re-post it in a bit clearer version.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If a man is married to a women and he provides her everything of which she is in need of.He treats her with respect.kindness and love still then if the women refuses to comply with her husband...........what if the men refused to have sex with his wife.....how would you view it now.


I wouldn't care if a man gave his wife the Earth on a platter of gold and jewels, she still has the right to refuse sex. And what if the man refused to have sex with his wife? It would be his right just as it's the woman's right to say no.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Sex is a basic instinct.............if both of those are married and don't have sex.....what would it result in?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As far as sex with slave girls is concerned here is what the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad say to those who by force have sex with their wives and slave girls:


Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29

Narrated Al-Ma'rur: At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names." The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.


None of that mentions anything to do with forced sex with a slave. It talks about how a Muslim should treat a slave who is Muslim. What it really should be saying is that the slave owner should be setting the slave free, anything else is immoral, unjust and inhumane.



Again, it doesn't mention anything about forced sex being wrong. It mentions a slave being set free as punishment for their master hitting them in the face. The Qu'ran already mentions that hitting a woman in the face isn't allowed so therefore the slave owner is being punished for breaking this rule, the punishment is the loss of a slave. Also ask yourself, why is the slave only being freed as punishment for the slaves master, why is the slave not being set free because it's wrong for a human to own another human?


Again this mentions nothing about forced sex with a slave.



And again, this mentions nothing about sex with slaves. In fact this verse isn't even referring to slaves at all. See the spoiler for an explanation from a tafsir :



So as you can see it had nothing at all to do with slaves or slavery.

QUOTE

Something Important on Slavery:

<a href="http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...ry_in_isla.html" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...ry_in_isla.html" target="_blank">http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...ry_in_isla.html</a></a>

<a href="http://www.understanding-islam.com/discuss...ep-a-slave-girl" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.understanding-islam.com/discuss...ep-a-slave-girl" target="_blank">http://www.understanding-islam.com/discuss...ep-a-slave-girl</a></a>


Something more important about slavery - it's unjust, immoral and inhumane. A human is not a commodity to be sold, bought and owned.

QUOTE
Slaves weren't like pets or video games as you have quoted them.Slaves weren't those who were treated like servants or tools which were to be used at any time.You really need to re-read the entire Islamic History or I guess your memory is weak.


Why do I need to re-read the entire Islamic history? What exactly am I missing here, please do explain.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

All the above Verses and Hadith are on the rights of Slaves.

Here is what Islam say to those who by force have sex with their wives (or slave girls is the same):

<a href="http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/Women/rape_in_islam.asp" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/Women/rape_in_islam.asp" target="_blank">http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/Women/rape_in_islam.asp</a></a>

<a href="http://www.submission.org/women/[censored].html" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.submission.org/women/" target="_blank">http://www.submission.org/women/</a>[censored].html</a>

Slavery is unjust, immoral and inhumane according to it's general statement or meaning or that practiced by Non-Muslims but it's not the same taking in consideration the description laid by Islam.

You previously said that slaves were like video games and pets but this was not the way they were treated...............to find out this you need to re-read Islamic History. 

And the point you previously raised about wife beating ...........there is no wife beating(according to many scholars it is but this man's point has weight):
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE&feature=relmfu" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE...;feature=relmfu" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE...;feature=relmfu</a></a>
(Allah Knows Best)


<!--hr--><hr title=""/><!--/hr--><b><!--sizeo:1--><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Posts merged<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--></b>

<b>Second Half: 
</b>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Some evidence that Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran :<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The very first verses that you quoted about questioning the Prophet(S.A.W) have again been twisted out of context.The Prophet(S.A.W) had always consulted his companions in all matters(such as battle of Trench and Uhud).He always took the views of other people into consideration.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Another verse telling people not to converse with Mohammed. This verse was also "miraculously" sent down at a time when Mohammed was beginning to become annoyed with people questioning him. The only reason he would not want people questioning him is if he had something to hide and was worried about being caught out<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is again a self opinion about Muhammad and the verse.Were u inside Muhammad(S.A.W) or could read his heart and feelings to tell that he was annoyed.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Surely anyone who was speaking for God would have no problems answering all the questions that humanity could throw at him.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You just quoted verses and gave your view or interpretation of the verse.You didn't even quote one question that was left unanswered.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's also another rule specifically for Mohammed which declares that no-one may marry his wives after he dies. Was he worried that information might slip pointing towards the fact that he was making it all up as he went along?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is again a twist of words.Quran clearly states that they were the Mothers of the Faithful.All his wives were a complete guidance for women to follow.They were the women of great knowledge and dignity.Even the Prophet's companions consulted them and learned from them.

If Muhammad(S.A.W)'s wives knew his secrets then why would they remain Muslims.They would have told everyone after his death that he wasn't a true Messenger.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mohammed gets the greater share of war booty. And why would God (a being supposedly beyond our comprehension, free from the trappings of Earthly desires and a being who could create anything he wants) need war booty? In otherwords, the war booty is for Mohammed but it sounds better if it's for God.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It's not that Allah needs booty.It means to spend the booty in His way(ex:helping poor,widows and orphans).


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Qu'ran 33:30 - "O wives of the Prophet, whoever of you should commit a clear immorality - for her the punishment would be doubled two fold, and ever is that, for Allah , easy." - Mohammeds wives get double punishment for misbehaving.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

For not misbehaving but committing a sin because they were the Mothers of the Faithful.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Qu'ran 16:101 - "And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse - and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down - they say, "You, [O Muhammad], are but an inventor [of lies]." But most of them do not know." - Mohammed gets caught out making it all up so God sends down a verse to back him up. This goes hand in hand with the abrogation verse.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

If he gets caught up,then the people there were fool enough to again believe in him after this verse.....Can you please quote the verse about which the Quran is talking about.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Qu'ran 18:86 - "Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it [as if] setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people. Allah said, "O Dhul-Qarnayn, either you punish [them] or else adopt among them [a way of] goodness."" - The sun does not set in a spring of dark mud nor does it appear like it sets in a spring of dark mud.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-dad389i4c[/youtube]

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Qu'ran 21:33 - "And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all [heavenly bodies] in an orbit are swimming." - The Sun does not swim along in an orbit. However this does hold up with the average thought back then that the Earth was the centre of the universe and that the Sun and the Moon orbited us rather than us orbiting the Sun.

Qu'ran 36:38 - "And the sun runs [on course] toward its stopping point. That is the determination of the Exalted in Might, the Knowing." - The Sun is stationary and does not go towards a stopping place.

Qu'ran 36:40 - "It is not allowable for the sun to reach the moon, nor does the night overtake the day, but each, in an orbit, is swimming." - Evidence that in the above verses it's talking about the Sun orbiting the Earth, and that Mohammed believed that the Sun and the Moon followed the same orbital trajectory.

Qu'ran 23:14 - "Then We made the sperm-drop into a clinging clot, and We made the clot into a lump [of flesh], and We made [from] the lump, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh; then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allah , the best of creators." - This is not how an embryo is formed at all. At no point are we a "clinging clot". Also flesh does not come after bone during the formation of a foetus, it happens all at the same time.

Qu'ran 86:6-7 - "He was created from a fluid, ejected, Emerging from between the backbone and the ribs." - That's not where sperm comes from, it is however where ancient Greek scientists and philosophers thought it came from.

Qu'ran 67:5 - "And We have certainly beautified the nearest heaven with stars and have made [from] them what is thrown at the devils and have prepared for them the punishment of the Blaze." - In reality there's no such thing as "shooting stars", stars are stationary.

Qu'ran 67:19 - "Do they not see the birds above them with wings outspread and [sometimes] folded in? None holds them [aloft] except the Most Merciful. Indeed He is, of all things, Seeing." - There is a scientific reason why birds can fly. It's not God holding them aloft. <a href="http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceS.../FlyLesson3.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceS.../FlyLesson3.htm" target="_blank">http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceS.../FlyLesson3.htm</a></a>

Qu'ran 2:222 - "They will ask you about menstruation. Say, 'It is harmful, so keep away from women during it. Do not approach them until they are purified of it, when they are purified you may approach them as Allah has ordained." - Menstruation is not harmful, it's perfectly normal and natural. There is a scientific reason for it.

There's more stuff in the Qu'ran itself that I could go on about if you like?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

An explained note on Human Embryology in Quran:
<a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm" target="_blank">http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm</a></a>

All the other so-called scientific errors in The Quran(an explanation of the verses about creation of the Universe and so on):
<a href="http://www.creationofuniverse.com/index.html" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.creationofuniverse.com/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.creationofuniverse.com/index.html</a></a>

<a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/" target="_blank">http://www.islam-guide.com/</a></a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It gets many things wrong about Christianity. Christians don't worship Jesus and Mary in place of or along with God, and not all Christians follow the teaching of the Trinity. It also declares that Jesus can not be the son of God because God can not have children, yet it also states that God is capable of all things.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Of course He is capable of all things but it has not been mentioned that which capabilities He uses.
(Allah Knows Best)

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran claims the Earth was created for us and that the animal kingdom and humans were created at the same time. So what about the dinosaurs?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Quran has not directly mentioned about dinosaurs but it does give a hint:
<a href="http://www.answering-christianity.com/dinosaurs.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.answering-christianity.com/dinosaurs.htm" target="_blank">http://www.answering-christianity.com/dinosaurs.htm</a></a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran claims that God is compassionate, yet he allows one human the right to own another human.

The Qu'ran claims that God knows everything you'll do from the moment of birth to the moment of death, yet at the same time claims that life is a test. If God knows the answer already why does he need to test us?

The Qu'ran claims that God is compassionate. However God also makes people unbelievers and sends them to hell. If he's compassionate and he knows that disbelief will send you to hell for an eternity of torture why is making people disbelievers?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

There is no doubt that He is Compassionate.You mentioned about owning another Human being but you did not mention that slave's position in the Society.

God knows what you will do(for example there are some intelligent students against some weak or dumb students the Teacher would obviously know that which student will be able to pass the Test) 
He also sent plenty of Messengers for those unbelievers to repent but they did not so He has to be just in treatment with those who believe in Him and those who don't.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran talks about boiling water to use as a means of torture but makes no mention whatsoever of how useful it is to boil water for hygienes sake.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Boiling water is used to describe Hell in the Quran even if it does not mention it there are plenty of other things that it has mentioned:
<a href="http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm" target="_blank">http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm</a></a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran claims that stars adorn the lowest heaven and that the Moon is in their midst. There is only one star in our solar system. However to the naked eye it does appear the way Mohammed described it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Does the verse say that the stars were in our solar system and does it mention about the moon being along or leveled with them.......The stars could be above the moon.
I will search on this and try to give you a better explanation.
(Allah Knows Best) 

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mohammed forced Zayd to divorce his wife and then married her himself claiming it to be "Gods will". Another example of Mohammed being greedy and lustful.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Sorry but i have no idea of this and never heard of it(please post the source to it).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mohammed married a 6 yr old girl and consummated the relationship when she was 9. Yes this was acceptable at the time, but if he truly was an example for "all mankind for all time" then it's something he should not have done. And surely an all knowing God would have known this isn't acceptable behaviour.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Muhammad(S.A.W) had not married the girl on his own but his friend Abu Bakr wanted him to marry his daughter Aisha.He used to play with Aisha until she had reached puberty and attained maturity.This does set an example for future Muslims but not to marry small children but to marry anyone seeing his virtue and the degree of piety.

It all depends upon a person that how he perceives a thing either negatively or positively.

A very good site that proves that Muhammad(S.A.W) is not the creator of Islam.
A very well description of all miracles of Islam and Quran:
<a href="http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/index.php" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/index.php" target="_blank">http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/index.php</a></a>


----------



## Gh0sti (Jun 20, 2011)

ugh i cant believe people predict this stuff and then dump people start to give money waste their lives and time on the crack pot idiots who are out to get a quick buck

like the Bible Says no one knows, why would God let man know when he's coming that's knowledge only he know's true believers need to live like everyday that Christ is coming, that is how it is to be, being passionate followers 

i hate these "false' prophets that are leading people astray if people would have common sense they wouldnt be strayed so easily


----------



## Tanas (Jun 20, 2011)

squirrelman10 said:
			
		

> ugh i cant believe people predict this stuff and then dump people start to give money waste their lives and time on the crack pot idiots who are out to get a quick buck
> 
> like the Bible Says no one knows, why would God let man know when he's coming that's knowledge only he know's true believers need to live like everyday that Christ is coming, that is how it is to be, being passionate followers
> 
> i hate these "false' prophets that are leading people astray if people would have common sense they wouldnt be strayed so easily


It's the lack of common sense that makes believers believe in this bullshit to begin with.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jun 20, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3723929:date=Jun 18 2011, 05:26 PM:name=Maz7006)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Maz7006 @ Jun 18 2011, 05:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3723929"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->i remember back in the day, once at a friday prayer, a shaikh was talking about this. Although it is valid what you are saying, submitting yourself to god is not enough . You see muslims these days pray and what not, but wont hesitate to lie, steal or kill. I don;t believe in much these days, but regardless simply just believing in god and submitting yourself to him is not enough<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A person who truly believes and has submitted his will to God cannot hurt another living being. He won't steal and will try his best not to lie. Someone who claims to be Muslim but doesn't follow these basic and clear commandments is not Muslim.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What I mean by the whole criticism thing is that you refuse to criticise Islam where it's appropriate.  Most people I've met who argue for the Qu'ran but aren't Muslims have no problems criticisng Islam where it needs to be criticised.  Again your response to slavery in Islam is a perfect example.  You refuse to say that Islam is wrong for saying it's ok to have slaves.  

And your English is definitely good seeing as how you're not a native speaker.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I refuse to say the Qur'an is wrong about saying slavery is OK because it doesn't say so. Every criticism has an answer. As a non-Muslim I was giving you the point of view of a Muslim. It had little to do with me. Even if I had agreed to something you said, to present a Muslim's point of view I had to ignore it and find what a Muslim would respond. Which wasn't very hard considering I was practically Muslim.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That is you superimposing your own morality onto Islam.  Here is an official fatwa on the matter. <a href="http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=81469" target="_blank">http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.ph...Id&Id=81469</a>

The only stipulation for polygamy is that the husband can treat all wives equitably.  Nothing more, nothing less.  While I salute and support your modernisation of the Qu'ran and it's morals what you're preaching isn't what is taught in mainstream Islam nor is it what was taught by Mohammed and his companions.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). (4:129) I don't see how it can get much clearer than that. Besides, that site doesn't give the full quote, so here it is: <b>If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans,</b> marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or that which your right hands possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (3)

I could care less of what is preached in mainstream Islam and in the Hadith.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My mistake and my apologies.  However, as you know the story of how it was compiled then you also know the lengths they went to ensure that the version scribed was completely authentic.  Very similar measurements were used to safeguard the authenticity of the Hadiths, hence their separation into Weak, Strong etc.  There is a whole Islamic "science" regarding the transmissions of the Hadith taking them back to the companions themselves.  The strong Hadiths (Sahih) are no more fallible than the Uthman Qu'ran.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree that there were very drastic measures taken, it doesn't change the fact that they were compiled, for the eldest, over 200 years after Muhammad's death. Do you know how a word can be deformed in a chain of 30 person playing Telephone? Here the chain is big and lasts three lifetimes. Whatever measure was taken to know were a Hadith came from, it doesn't mean they are authentic or even remotely reliable. There is a very very big difference between 19 years and two centuries. When the compilation of the Qur'an started, many of those who had memorized the Qur'an during the time of the Prophet were still alive. Verses were written down on parchment and palm leaves, a little everywhere. There were  partial compilations in existence. For the Hadith, there was nothing. Oral transmission doesn't work well.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Whether you believe they hold no weight whatsoever is irrelevant.  They are authentic Islam, authentic Islamic history, the closest you'll get to an honest biography of Mohammed and also authentic Arabic history to a minor extent.  As a source of biography for Mohammed himself there is no better.  Most new Muslims are taught that they should emulate Mohammed as closely in deed and action (and in some extreme sects appearance, although I don't consider you anywhere near this category).  Without the Hadith how would this be possible?  Then there's also the case of some of the missing info.  There's detailed information about things like zakat and salat in there that's not in the Qu'ran.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The absence of something better doesn't make it good. What Muslims are taught today is wrong. Muhammad was the embodiment of the ideals of the Qur'an. Following his Sunna or emulating him means to follow the Qur'an. Ah, the missing info. You see, us Muslim believe Islam and all it's teachings have existed since Adam. The five pillars were given to Abraham and, thus, existed in pre-islamic times. Salat, Zakat, Hajj, Shahada and Sawn were practices that already existed before Muhammad. To get the real form of Salat, one must simply remove the parts that don't make sense. Like including Muhammad in the Shahada. It goes against the commandment to consider all prophets equal. And the five times of prayer are mentioned in the Qur'an along with the basic positions(bowing, prostrating, etc).

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->lol That actually made me laugh out loud.  I've heard some apologist rubbish in my time but that takes the biscuit.  Show me the verse I posted that says free your slaves at every occasion.  The only one I posted that even related to the freeing of a slave was this one :



Spoiler



Qu'ran 4:92 - And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased's family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer - then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty - then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] - then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah . And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.



All that mentions is setting a slave free if a Muslim kills another Muslim by accident.  Along with the stipulation that the slave must be Muslim themself.  How is that "at every opportunity"?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You didn't post all the verses that mention slaves, here:


Spoiler



But those who divorce their wives by Zihar, then wish to go back on the words they uttered― (it is ordained that such a one) <b>should free a slave</b> before they touch each other: this are ye admonished to perform: and Allah is well-acquainted with (all) that ye do. (3)





Spoiler



Allah will not call you to account for what is void in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed then indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or <b>give a slave his freedom</b>. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth Allah make clear to you His Signs, that ye may be grateful. (89)





Spoiler



And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allâh enriches them of His Bounty. <b>And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allâh which He has bestowed upon you.</b> And force not your maids to prostitution, if they desire chastity, in order that you may make a gain in the (perishable) goods of this worldly life. But if anyone compels them (to prostitution), then after such compulsion, Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to those women, i.e. He will forgive them because they have been forced to do this evil act unwillingly). (33)





Spoiler



The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and <b>to free the slaves</b> and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise. (60)





Spoiler



It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and <b>to set slaves free</b>; and observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are they who are sincere. Such are the God-fearing. (177)



<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Where does it also state that those slaves must be slaves you brought with you on conversion?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was an example of how a Muslim could have gotten possession of them.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Those verses clearly show that owning a slave is acceptable.  If owning a slave was unacceptable it also wouldn't mention sex with slaves as being Halal, it would clearly state that they were considered Haram.  And just think of how much quicker slavery in Arabia would have disappeared if he had just said that.

I know that phrase can have other meanings, but in the context of these verses it's slave.  The tafsirs all agree on this.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Qu'ran clearly states that captive women are lawful for sex.



Spoiler



Quran 33:50 - "O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful."


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It just means that you can have sex with slaves and prisoners of war. But the condition for sex is and always was: marriage. Which requires the consent of both parties. So if a captive wants to marry him, it is ok.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jun 20, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> A person who truly believes and has submitted his will to God cannot hurt another living being. He won't steal and will try his best not to lie. Someone who claims to be Muslim but doesn't follow these basic and clear commandments is not Muslim.



Prison statistics and the 4 times greater amount of Muslims in the prison system than the general population would disagree with you. Many would say they are true Muslims. Many would also say they haven't done anything wrong because they didn't target other Muslims, or what they have done isn't against Islamic law. It's all in your interpretation.


----------



## BobTheJoeBob (Jun 20, 2011)

cwstjdenobs said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If they've killed innocent people, they're not following the Qur'an. If they steal, they're not following the Qur'an.
It doesn't matter how many muslims are in the prison system. If you follow the rules set out to the best of your ability, you're a good muslim, it's as simple as that.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jun 20, 2011)

BobTheJoeBob said:
			
		

> If they've killed innocent people, they're not following the Qur'an. If they steal, they're not following the Qur'an.
> It doesn't matter how many muslims are in the prison system. If you follow the rules set out to the best of your ability, you're a good muslim, it's as simple as that.



But they would pick and choose choice quotes to back up their own interpretation, as you will for your interpretation. The prohibitions against killing and stealing can be interpreted as only within your own "tribe" within all the Abrahamic religions.

EDIT: Also the whole concept of taqiya, and the habit of leaving things out of English translations of the Koran makes it a bit hard to trust someone who will not admit there is anything even slightly dubious in the Koran. Also I think this is the perfect example of it all being in the interpretation http://youtu.be/kOOQtMgLB3M

EDIT the second: Yes, before you say it I know there are interpretations that deny the whole idea of taqiyya too.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 21, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3725142:date=Jun 19 2011, 03:01 PM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 19 2011, 03:01 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3725142"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*snipped out stuff about Polygamy for space<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I know Islam didn't invent polygamy.  Using that line of defence is no different than saying "Well Islam might say this but look at what Christianity says".  I really couldn't care less.  Does Christianity still allow polygamy?

You're also repeating yourself.  I've already agreed to everything you're saying.  It has absolutely nothing to do with the point I'm making.  The point I'm making is that this rule shows inequality  towards women.  The statistics have changed now.  In many countries men outnumber women.  If men are allowed to marry multiple wives in those circumstances then really shouldn't it be fair that women can have multiple husbands in the same circumstances?  No provision was put in for this because the Qu'ran erringly believed that women would always outnumber men.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No a Prophet cannot change any rule according to his will.This is what you believe about Muhammad(S.A.W) but the Quran itself states,
"Nor does he say anything of his own desire.It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him."(Surah An-Najm)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

In your rush to defend Mohammed you've completely overlooked the point.  The point I'm making is that there has to be a prophet to speak for God.  Wihtout a prophet to speak for God then God can not change any of the rules/laws.  God doesn't speak directly to people (not since the Old Testament), even Mohammed wasn't spoken to directly by God.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*snipped out videos for space<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've already seen those videos.  The only people they'll convince are people who are already believers.  They're not for convincing, they're for reassuring.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->By following the Quran and the example of the Holy Prophet(S.A.W).I follow the Holy Prophet(S.A.W) in not every aspect because it's not possible to cover every aspect at the age of 16 but as far as my knowledge exceeds I always follow his example.No, never! i always stay on to the pure Islamic principals not any other teachings(ex: shia).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Are you following Mohammed according to the teachings of the companions?  Or according to the writings of Ibn Kathr or Al-Jalalayn?  Or are you following modern interpretations of Islam like Pyrmon?  Remember to follow true Islam you need to follow what Mohammed taught, and to know what Mohammed taught you have to get closer to his time - not further away.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->When and where did Muhammad(S.A.W) rode topless?Please quote any verse which says men are allowed to bare their stomachs.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I never used to keep records of these things (I have started doing it only recently) and can't find the Hadith I'm particularly thinking of, however I did find these showing Mohammed baring his stomach/abdomen and his thigh.



Spoiler



Sahih Muslim 19:4442 - "It has been reported on the authority of Barra' who said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) was carrying the earth with us on the Day of Ahzab and the whiteness of his belly had been covered with earth. (While engaged in this toil) he was reciting: By God, if Thou hadst not guided us We would have neither been guided aright nor practised charity, Nor offered prayers. Descend on us peace and tranquillity. Behold I these people (the Meccans) refused to follow us. According to another version, he recited: The chieftains (of the tribes) refused to follow us When they contemplated mischief, we rejected it. And with this (verse) he would raise his voice."

Sahih Bukhari 4:52:90 - "Narrated Al-Bara:  On the day (of the battle) of Al-Ahzab (i.e. clans) I saw the Prophet carrying earth, and the earth was covering the whiteness of his abdomen. And he was saying, "Without You (O Allah!) we would have got no guidance, nor given in charity, nor prayed. So please bless us with tranquility and make firm our feet when we meet our enemies.  Indeed (these) people have rebelled against (oppressed) us but never shall we yield if they try to bring affliction upon us.""

Sahih Bukhari 9:90:342 - "Narrated Al-Bara' bin 'Azib:  The Prophet was carrying earth with us on the day of the battle of Al-Ahzab (confederates) and I saw that the dust was covering the whiteness of his abdomen, and he (the Prophet ) was saying, "(O Allah) ! Without You, we would not have been guided, nor would we have given in charity, nor would we have prayed. So (O Allah!) please send tranquility (Sakina) upon us as they, (the chiefs of the enemy tribes) have rebelled against us. And if they intend affliction (i.e. want to frighten us and fight against us) then we would not (flee but withstand them). And the Prophet used to raise his voice with it."

Sahih Bukhari 1:8:367 - "Narrated 'Abdul 'Aziz:  Anas said, 'When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, 'Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.' He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, 'Muhammad (has come).' (Some of our companions added, "With his army.") We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, 'O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.' The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Allah's Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.' So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.' Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her."  Thabit asked Anas, "O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?" He said, "Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her." Anas added, "While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet . So the Prophet was a bridegroom and he said, 'Whoever has anything (food) should bring it.' He spread out a leather sheet (for the food) and some brought dates and others cooking butter. (I think he (Anas) mentioned As-SawTq). So they prepared a dish of Hais (a kind of meal). And that was Walrma (the marriage banquet) of Allah's Apostle .""



Also, here is a website talking about the Islamic dress code for men and women.  According to the Shari'a a men need only cover navel/waist to knee.  So there's no problem with men showing the abdomen according to it.

<a href="http://www.albalagh.net/food_for_thought/dress.shtml" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.albalagh.net/food_for_thought/dress.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.albalagh.net/food_for_thought/dress.shtml</a></a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The One which I follow is Allah(the One and Only).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I knew you were going to answer with that.  I said to myself when posting my previous response that I should go further into detail.

Yes I know you follow Allah.  Allah is the Arabic word for God (although if you dig further into the history of the word you'll see it differently).  This is the same god that the Christians and the Jews follow (also known as Yahweh).  This particular god was first taught about by Abraham.  Therefore it is the Abrahamic god.  It's not a Hindu god, a Greek god, an Indian god, a Native American god, a Maori god, a Chinese god, a Japanese god etc. etc.

You might believe that you follow the one and only god, however so do all the other people following their religion.  They believe you follow the wrong god just like you believe they follow the wrong god(s).  This is also a very good indication that god(s) are man-made.  Every ancient culture had their own particular god(s).  This is because they saw things in their own particular way according the world around them.  Think of it as humans first attempt at science and philosophy.  There were other gods long before there was Allah/God/Yahweh.  The first known recorded religion was the Sumerian religion, one which the Abrahamic faith borrows from quite extensively.  In fact the whole idea in Islam of humans being slaves to their creator comes from the Sumerian religion.  The flood myth also comes from the Sumerian religion, although it does have differences.  The Sumerians also talk about their god having created the universe, as do the Chinese (Pangu/Jade Emperor), Greeks (Gaia), Hawaiian (Kumulipo) and many more.

Some of them also talk about how the heavens and the Earth were one and then broken apart, long before Islam and the other Judaic faiths came about.  Islamic scholars and Muslims have been saying that about the Big Bang being in the Qu'ran long before science talked about it.  Well that very same idea was in other religions before Islam.  Just as most of the stuff in Islam was already previously talked about by other religions, scholars and just smart people in general.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Of course not.

Prophet Muhammad was an illiterate man who had no formal education in any science, language, religious or secular.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

When it speaks about "unlettered man" in the Qu'ran it doesn't necessarily mean that Mohammed was illiterate, it could just be referring to him having no formal education. I've had little formal education, I never finished school.  It however hasn't stopped me learning lots of information since.  You don't have to go to a school to learn things.  Mohammed was a trader who regularly went on trading expeditions while married to his first wife.  There was ample opportunity for him to pick up any information.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Quran speaks about a variety of branches of science like: Astronomy, Embryology, Hydrology, Geology, Sociology, Psychology, Oceanography, Law etc. including lots of scientific statements that were validated only recently and were not known in the time of the prophet.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

All of the stuff that you mentioned was known during the time of Mohammed, most of it long before.  Even alot of the laws in the Shari'a.  There is very little in the Qu'ran that is original.  Study something other than Islam (and information from Islamic scholars) and you'll see this.  If you care to post what you think wasn't known or thought of at the time of Mohammed I can show you the evidence that disproves it, including where he got things wrong.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It was not known about prophet Muhammad any scholarly tendencies or achievements until the age of forty (when he received the first verses of Quran). So, how this illiterate man suddenly brings about a book like the Quran including an ideological and religious revolution that changed history?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

He didn't suddenly bring about the Qu'ran tho did he.  The Qu'ran wasn't revealed all in one go, it was revealed over the space of 22 years.  So Mohammed had plenty of time to speak to others and learn from them.  He had amongst his followers doctors, scientists and scholars so there was no problem with learning information from them.

As for how he could write the religious text.  He learned Christianity from his Aunt I believe it was, other relatives followed an offshoot of the Abrahamic faith (one that Islam borrows alot from including some of the Shari'a punsihments) and there was also a large Jewish community.

Ideological ideas?  That's pretty simple as well.  Most of the government ideology came later on in the Qu'ran, when he actually had enough followers to start being considered a power.  Alot of the ideas he had actually come from Jewish ideas (social security, zakat, no interest etc), some came from the ideas of people like Plato and many other sources.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), if he authored the Quran, honor the virgin Mary (May Allah be pleased with her), the mother of Jesus (peace be on him) as the best woman over all women on earth over all ages until day of judgment (an honor that even not offered by the bible) while not mentioning his own family members with a single word and even not mentioning any name of them.?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

If he'd have said he wrote he would have been no different than anyone else at the time.  He also would have not have been paid attention to by many because of his uneducated status.

Then you also have the fact that he was hoping to get the local Jews and Christians to follow him.  If he'd have claimed that he wrote the Qu'ran rather than the Abrahamic god then none of them would have listened to him, let alone follow him.  Plus, if the book comes from God then questioning it is blasphemous and could send you to hell (this is even stated in the Qu'ran itself - doubt will send you to hell).

There are many many many many reasons why he said it was from the Abrahamic god rather than himself. 

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If he had authored the Quran, why he didn't claim this authorship of Quran and consequently gaining higher prestige among his followers who may consider him as a God.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What higher prestige is their than being a prophet of the Abrahamic god?  None of his followers would have considered him a god, he would have been thought of as a clever man similar to Plato or Socrates.  Plus being a prophet of God gave him more power and authority.  People are likely to question a mans authority and decision but not so quick to question a gods authority and decision.  Are you willing to question any of the things in the Qu'ran?  No ask yourself, if Mohammed claimed authorship of the Qu'ran would you be willing to question any of the things in it?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why he mentioned Quran verses that reprimand him (as that of chapter 33, verse 37 and chapter 80 verses 1-3) if he wrote Quran by himself?.

Source:http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_Quran_the_true_word_of_God<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What about the verses that give him special permissions?  And what about the verses that told off his wives (including telling them that God would make Mohammed divorce his wives and give them better ones)? There were plenty of times that God was quick to bestow favours upon him.



<!--hr--><hr title=""/><!--/hr--><b><!--sizeo:1--><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Posts merged<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--></b>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There treatment is the same as treatment of Non-Muslims(who aren't slaves).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Are non-Muslim slaves allowed to marry?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't understand what are you trying to say....please re-post it in a bit clearer version.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I can't really break it down any easier than I have.  The problem you're having isn't comprehension of the words, it's comprehension of the idea itself.  You are taught god says something and to you that's the way it is.  I put forward something that goes completely against what god says yet is more logical and right, so you have a problem understanding the idea itself.  However I'll try to break it down simpler for you.

You said that if a wife refuses to have sex with her husband that this could cause the man to go out and attack a woman sexually.  You said that it would be the wifes fault if this happened.

I said this would in no way be the wifes fault.  If the husband went out and attacked a woman because he didn't get sex at home it would be entirely his fault.  We as humans have learnt something called self control.  The husband who goes out and attacks a woman because his wife refused him sex obviously has no self-control.  Therefore it is HIS fault that he attacked a woman, not the wifes fault.  He was the one who chose to attack a woman, so the blame rests entirely on him.  What the husband should learn to do is control his lust and choose NOT to attack a woman.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slavery is unjust, immoral and inhumane according to it's general statement or meaning or that practiced by Non-Muslims but it's not the same taking in consideration the description laid by Islam.

You previously said that slaves were like video games and pets but this was not the way they were treated...............to find out this you need to re-read Islamic<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Again, you're missing the point entirely.  I have said over and over that treatment means nothing.  The idea of a human being owned by another human being is immoral, unjust and inhumane.  Not the actual treatment but the actual ownership.  You keep presenting them like they are just staff or workers, however staff and workers have the choice to quit there jobs - slaves do not.  Mohammed even stated in the Hadith that a runaway slave will go to hell.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And the point you previously raised about wife beating ...........there is no wife beating(according to many scholars it is but this man's point has weight):
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE&feature=relmfu" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE...;feature=relmfu" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE...;feature=relmfu</a></a>
(Allah Knows Best)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

From the Tafsir of al-Jalalayn :



Spoiler



Men are in charge of, they have authority over, women, disciplining them and keeping them in check, because of that with which God has preferred the one over the other, that is, because God has given them the advantage over women, in knowledge, reason, authority and otherwise, and because of what they expend, on them [the women], of their property. Therefore righteous women, among them, are obedient, to their husbands, guarding in the unseen, that is, [guarding] their private parts and otherwise during their spouses’ absence, because of what God has guarded, for them, when He enjoined their male spouses to look after them well. And those you fear may be rebellious, disobedient to you, when such signs appear, admonish them, make them fear God, and share not beds with them, retire to other beds if they manifest such disobedience, and strike them, but not violently, if they refuse to desist [from their rebellion] after leaving them [in separate beds]. If they then obey you, in what is desired from them, do not seek a way against them, a reason to strike them unjustly. God is ever High, Great, so beware of Him, lest He punish you for treating them unjustly.



It clearly states that husbands are allowed to strike their wives for disobedience.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 21, 2011)

Responses to reasons why I think Mohammed made it up himself.



Spoiler






> The very first verses that you quoted about questioning the Prophet(S.A.W) have again been twisted out of context.The Prophet(S.A.W) had always consulted his companions in all matters(such as battle of Trench and Uhud).He always took the views of other people into consideration.



They weren't taken out of context at all.  He may have consulted his compnaions in all matters, but ultimately they had to obey and follow him.



> This is again a self opinion about Muhammad and the verse.Were u inside Muhammad(S.A.W) or could read his heart and feelings to tell that he was annoyed.



I don't need to read his heart and feelings.  The verse states what it does.  Do not annoy the prophet.  If he was the perfect man and the role model for all time being annoyed by questions shouldn't have been part of his personality.

Let me give you another chapter to go look at objectively.  Do you know the reasons behind the chapter Al-Tahrim?



> You just quoted verses and gave your view or interpretation of the verse.You didn't even quote one question that was left unanswered.



What does that even have to do with it?  The fact of the matter is the verse says not to ask complicated questions.  Would you ask Mohammed difficult questions after the revealing of this verse or would you obey God?



> This is again a twist of words.Quran clearly states that they were the Mothers of the Faithful.All his wives were a complete guidance for women to follow.They were the women of great knowledge and dignity.Even the Prophet's companions consulted them and learned from them.



It's not a twist of words at all.  Why would marrying someone else, some like say Abu Bakr, stop them from being the mothers of the faithful?  Why would them getting remarried affect anything at all as long as they married good men?



> If Muhammad(S.A.W)'s wives knew his secrets then why would they remain Muslims.They would have told everyone after his death that he wasn't a true Messenger.



Because it gave them power and privilege.  Why would a Queen give up her kingdom?



> It's not that Allah needs booty.It means to spend the booty in His way(ex:helping poor,widows and orphans).



Why not just use the words "For Allah", why "For Allah and his Messenger"?



> For not misbehaving but committing a sin because they were the Mothers of the Faithful.



Misbehaving and sin are the same thing to me.  Why should they get punished double though?  If they committed a sin and then repented it would be much more valuable as a role than someone who didn't commit sin because they were fearful of being flogged to death.



> If he gets caught up,then the people there were fool enough to again believe in him after this verse.....Can you please quote the verse about which the Quran is talking about.



I'll go one better.  I'll present you with the Tafsir of Al-Wahidi explaining why the verse was revealed.



> (And when We put a revelation in place of (another) revelation…) [16:101-102]. This verse was revealed when the idolaters said: “Muhammad is mocking his Companions; one day he commands them to do something and the next day he forbids them from doing it, or brings instead something which is easier. He is nothing but a calumniator who says things of his own invention”, and so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse and the verse after it.





> *snipped out video of Zakir Naik



Once again Zakir Naik doing what he does best, avoiding the issue by talking lots of nonsense about everything other than the subject.  Here's an experiment for you to try.  Go outside during the sunset and tell me what you see.  You'll see the sun setting in the horizon, a horizon that is so distant you can not make out the details. So unless the guy the verse is talking about had telescopic vision then the Sun could not look like it was setting in a muddy pool.





Spoiler






> An explained note on Human Embryology in Quran:
> <a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm" target="_blank">http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm</a></a>



Here's a suggestion, go to a non-Islamic site to learn about Embryology.  Islamic sites have to tell you the Qu'ran is correct because if it's wrong then it can not be the word of the creator of the universe.

Here, try this video.  It's a Muslim attempting to debate the validity of the embryology in Qu'ran with someone who is an embryologist.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T5Pm7qLH50[/youtube]

And then follow it with this one.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGm-_etZmWk[/youtube]



> *snipped out other claims about scientific miracles



1) The Abrahamic god isn't the only god to have claimed to have created the universe.

2) Islam (or even Judaism) wasn't the first religion to claim that a god had created a "canopy" above us to protect us.

3) The roots of mountains don't actually pin down the crusts of the Earth.  Plus, other Greek philosophers proposed the idea that mountains had roots centuries before Islam.

4) Other religions also stated a similar theory to the creation of the universe in Islam that could be interpreted to be talking about the Big Bang.

And none of it corrects the problem that I pointed out about the Sun being on the orbital trajectory as the Moon.



> Of course He is capable of all things but it has not been mentioned that which capabilities He uses.
> (Allah Knows Best)



So you agree then that the Qu'ran is wrong when it says that it's impossible for God to have a Son?  And I noticed you completely skipped over the part about the Qu'ran being wrong about what Christians worship.



> Quran has not directly mentioned about dinosaurs but it does give a hint:



That only gives a hint towards dinosaurs being mentioned if you want to read that into it.  As Muslims say, context is everything.  When not taken out of context this passage is obviously talking about regular animals.



> There is no doubt that He is Compassionate.You mentioned about owning another Human being but you did not mention that slave's position in the Society.



As I've explained to you many many many many many times already, I couldn't care what their position in society was.  Ownership of another person is immoral, unjust and inhumane.  There is no amount of justification you can give to a rational human being with decent morals that will convince him otherwise.



> God knows what you will do(for example there are some intelligent students against some weak or dumb students the Teacher would obviously know that which student will be able to pass the Test)



So God knows that you will suffer an eternity of torment and torture beyond your wildest imgination and still allows you to be born.  Where's the compassion in that?



> He also sent plenty of Messengers for those unbelievers to repent but they did not so He has to be just in treatment with those who believe in Him and those who don't.



How is burning someone in fire for eternity just treatment?



> Boiling water is used to describe Hell in the Quran even if it does not mention it there are plenty of other things that it has mentioned:
> <a href="http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm" target="_blank">http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm</a></a>



And none of it is anything that wasn't already known at the time.



> Does the verse say that the stars were in our solar system and does it mention about the moon being along or leveled with them.......The stars could be above the moon.
> I will search on this and try to give you a better explanation.
> (Allah Knows Best)



It says the moon is in the midst of the stars.  To be in the midst of something it must be surrounded by other things. <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/midst" target="_blank">http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/midst</a>

It also claims that the Sun and the stars are seperate objects.  However in reality the Sun is a star.  Would the creator of the universe not know this?



> Sorry but i have no idea of this and never heard of it(please post the source to it).



Read 33:37 in the Qu'ran.  Here is the Tafsir explaining it.

And when (idh is dependent because of [an implied preceding] udhkur, ‘mention [when]’) you said to him to whom God had shown favour, by [guiding him to] Islam, and to whom you [too] had shown favour: by manumitting him — this was Zayd b. Hāritha, who had been a prisoner of war before [the coming of] Islam (in the period of al-jāhiliyya). The Messenger of God (s) purchased him before his call to prophethood, and then manumitted him and adopted him as his son — ‘Retain your wife for yourself and fear God’, before divorcing her. But you had hidden in your heart what God was to disclose, [what] He was to manifest of your love for her and of [the fact] that should Zayd part with her you would marry her, and you feared people, would say, ‘He has married his son’s wife!’, though God is worthier that you should fear Him, in all things, so take her in marriage and do not be concerned with what people say. Zayd subsequently divorced her and her [obligatory] waiting period was completed. God, exalted be He, says: So when Zayd had fulfilled whatever need he had of her, We joined her in marriage to you — the Prophet consummated his marriage with her without [the customary] permission [from her legal guardian] and gratified the Muslims with [a feast of] bread and meat — so that there may not be any restriction for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have fulfilled whatever wish they have of them. And God’s commandment, that which He has decreed, is bound to be realised.



> Muhammad(S.A.W) had not married the girl on his own but his friend Abu Bakr wanted him to marry his daughter Aisha.He used to play with Aisha until she had reached puberty and attained maturity.This does set an example for future Muslims but not to marry small children but to marry anyone seeing his virtue and the degree of piety.



I don't know who told you that but it's not the truth.



> Sahih Bukhari 7:62:18 - "Narrated 'Ursa:The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage.Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.""
> 
> <a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/062.sbt.html#007.062.018" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#007.062.018</a>
> 
> ...



So no, that's not what it was an example of.  Now ask yourself this question, why would an all-knowing god tell a prophet to do something that is so immoral?  And why would he tell a prophet to do something that he knew would become incredibly distasteful, if not repulsive, to the average man 1400 years later?



> It all depends upon a person that how he perceives a thing either negatively or positively.



I most definitely perceive it as negative.  I accept that at the time it was culturally acceptable, but it is not something that someone who was to be considered a role model for all mankind for all the ages should do.



> A very good site that proves that Muhammad(S.A.W) is not the creator of Islam.
> A very well description of all miracles of Islam and Quran:



I've already seen that site several times and each of their claims is complete nonsense.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 21, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3727032:date=Jun 20 2011, 12:53 PM:name=Pyrmon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pyrmon @ Jun 20 2011, 12:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3727032"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I refuse to say the Qur'an is wrong about saying slavery is OK because it doesn't say so. Every criticism has an answer. As a non-Muslim I was giving you the point of view of a Muslim. It had little to do with me. Even if I had agreed to something you said, to present a Muslim's point of view I had to ignore it and find what a Muslim would respond. Which wasn't very hard considering I was practically Muslim.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, let me make it easier for you then.  The Qu'ran says it's alright to strike your wife if she's disobedient.  Is the Qu'ran wrong for stating this?  Should a husband have the right to strike his wife?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). (4:129) I don't see how it can get much clearer than that. Besides, that site doesn't give the full quote, so here it is: <b>If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans,</b> marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or that which your right hands possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (3)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It could get clearer by saying "Unless these circumstances apply". lol  As it stands that verse is open to a multiple amount of interpretations, as is evidenced by the sheer number of interpretations.  Suggesting someone can't do something isn't the same as telling someone not to do something.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I could care less of what is preached in mainstream Islam and in the Hadith.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So you could care less what Mohammed taught?  Because Mohammed most definitely did not teach that polygamy was only to be followed under those circumstances.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I agree that there were very drastic measures taken, it doesn't change the fact that they were compiled, for the eldest, over 200 years after Muhammad's death. Do you know how a word can be deformed in a chain of 30 person playing Telephone? Here the chain is big and lasts three lifetimes. Whatever measure was taken to know were a Hadith came from, it doesn't mean they are authentic or even remotely reliable. There is a very very big difference between 19 years and two centuries. When the compilation of the Qur'an started, many of those who had memorized the Qur'an during the time of the Prophet were still alive. Verses were written down on parchment and palm leaves, a little everywhere. There were  partial compilations in existence. For the Hadith, there was nothing. Oral transmission doesn't work well.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That's where you're wrong about the Hadiths.  Yes they were compiled over 200 years later but they were not however written then.  There are many many many hadiths written from prior and just after Mohammeds death.  The first attempt at collecting the Hadiths was by Uthman himself during the compilation of the Qu'ran.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The absence of something better doesn't make it good. What Muslims are taught today is wrong. Muhammad was the embodiment of the ideals of the Qur'an. Following his Sunna or emulating him means to follow the Qur'an. Ah, the missing info. You see, us Muslim believe Islam and all it's teachings have existed since Adam. The five pillars were given to Abraham and, thus, existed in pre-islamic times. Salat, Zakat, Hajj, Shahada and Sawn were practices that already existed before Muhammad. To get the real form of Salat, one must simply remove the parts that don't make sense. Like including Muhammad in the Shahada. It goes against the commandment to consider all prophets equal. And the five times of prayer are mentioned in the Qur'an along with the basic positions(bowing, prostrating, etc).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And how are you so sure that what Muslims are taught today is wrong?  What makes you so sure that your Islam is the right one?  You're not following what Mohammed taught, you're making your own interpretation of the Qu'ran and following that.  As for all prophets being equal, that's not entirely true.  The Qu'ran states that Mohammed is a special prophet with privileges that no other prophet has/had.

If Mohammed is also the embodiment of the ideals of Islam then it means that the Wahabbi/Salafi are correct in their interpretation of the Qu'ran.  They attempt to follow Islam as preached about by Mohammed and the companions.  This means killing people who speak out against Mohammed (Qu'ran 9:24), it means sex with slaves without marriage is fine (Chapter Al-Tahrim). marrying pre-pubescent girls is fine (his marriage to Aisha), hitting a woman is acceptable (Mohammed struck Aisha for spying on him), slaughtering an entire tribe of people through beheading is fine (Bani Qurayzi) and the list goes on.  Do you think it's acceptable to marry a 6 year old girl, if not then why not?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You didn't post all the verses that mention slaves, here:<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I didn't.  I posted the ones relevant to showing that Islam accepts slavery as a social norm.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



But those who divorce their wives by Zihar, then wish to go back on the words they uttered― (it is ordained that such a one) <b>should free a slave</b> before they touch each other: this are ye admonished to perform: and Allah is well-acquainted with (all) that ye do. (3)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, it says to free a slave as punishment for going back on your word.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



Allah will not call you to account for what is void in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed then indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or <b>give a slave his freedom</b>. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth Allah make clear to you His Signs, that ye may be grateful. (89)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, so once again it's telling Muslims to free a slave as a punishment for something they've done wrong.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allâh enriches them of His Bounty. <b>And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allâh which He has bestowed upon you.</b> And force not your maids to prostitution, if they desire chastity, in order that you may make a gain in the (perishable) goods of this worldly life. But if anyone compels them (to prostitution), then after such compulsion, Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to those women, i.e. He will forgive them because they have been forced to do this evil act unwillingly). (33)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, and what happens if the master decides that there is nothing good and honest in the slave?  It doesn't say that they if a slave asks for freedom it must be granted, it leaves it up to the discretion of the slave owner.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and <b>to free the slaves</b> and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise. (60)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Read the Tafsirs of this verse.  What it's talking about here are the slaves who have entered into a contract to buy their freedom and supplying money towards it and this is in the hope of encouraging them to become Muslim.  So any slave who looks like he will never embrace Islam will not be party to this "charity".

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and <b>to set slaves free</b>; and observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are they who are sincere. Such are the God-fearing. (177)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Once again when you consult the teachings of Mohammed and his companions you find that what it's talking about here is manumitted slaves who are likely to become Muslim.

Now show me the verses that talk about unconditional release of all slaves and that owning a slave is immoral.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It was an example of how a Muslim could have gotten possession of them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And Mohammed also promoted the taking of female captives as war booty.  This was a privlege not just for him but for anyone that fought in battle.  This is how most slaves came to be in the Muslims posession at the time.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Read Al-Tahrim and then tell me that no sexual contact is authorised unless a marriage has taken place.  Also verse 23:6 says "Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed -"

Notice how the wives and slaves are an 'or" situation.  In otherwords no marriage with the slave needs to take place for the slave owner to have sex with them.  Show me the passage that states that a man must marry his slave to be able to have sex with her.

The Qu'ran also states that a slave girl should be treated like a wife.  And what does the Qu'ran say about a wife refusing sex with her husband?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It just means that you can have sex with slaves and prisoners of war. But the condition for sex is and always was: marriage. Which requires the consent of both parties. So if a captive wants to marry him, it is ok.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That's a very noble thought, and I congratulate you for wanting it to say that but the fact of the matter is that it doesn't.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 21, 2011)

Sorry bsfmtl123 but I've just noticed the second video in the spoilers above isn't showing properly.  I'm not entirely sure why but here's a direct link to it as well as the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGm-_etZmWk


----------



## ThePowerOutage (Jun 21, 2011)

I am a Christian, and this is what I believe:
The "Second Coming" already happened in 1914. Jesus didn't come to the earth, he started ruling in heaven and threw Satan the devil out of heaven.
The "End of the World" foretold by many is not the destruction of the Earth, but the destruction of the current system of things.
After that, God will judge everyone past and present and decide whether they should survive or not.
The people God decides shouldn't survive just cease to exist, or hell fire or eternal punishment. 
The people God decides should exist live in paradise conditions under rule by Jesus (and the 144,00, but i dont want to get that deep at 10:30), without the influence of the Devil.
After a thousand years of rulership, Satan is released and allowed to influence people for a very short time. Then he and anyone he misleads are destroyed. Rulership is handed over to God and then... Well, the sky is the limit.

This is what i believe, and I know at least one other person believes the same on this forum.
I'm not going to say what religion I am from, as I have made mistakes and I don't want my religion to be judged by those mistakes.


----------



## Tanas (Jun 24, 2011)

When a believer starts lying to defend their beliefs, its time to leave them alone.


----------



## MADKATZ99 (Jun 25, 2011)

I don't think I've mentioned this yet, but the book 'prophet of doom' by Craig Winn is really informative. (And it's free online)

Here 

"_Prophet of Doom_ is the best-documented, most comprehensive, presentation of Islam's five oldest and most reliable scriptural sources. Ishaq's Biography of Muhammad, Tabari's History of Islam, and Bukhari's and Muslim's Hadith, were used to reorder the Qur'an chronologically and to set its surahs into the context of Muhammad's life."


----------



## Miss Panda (Jun 25, 2011)

ThePowerOutage said:
			
		

> I am a Christian, and this is what I believe:
> The "Second Coming" already happened in 1914. Jesus didn't come to the earth, he started ruling in heaven and threw Satan the devil out of heaven.
> The "End of the World" foretold by many is not the destruction of the Earth, but the destruction of the current system of things.
> After that, God will judge everyone past and present and decide whether they should survive or not.
> ...


You Jehovah's Witness's must have very creative bible to back all that up.


----------



## MADKATZ99 (Jun 25, 2011)

Miss Panda said:
			
		

> You Jehovah's Witness's must have very creative bible to back all that up.


It was pretty obvious wasn't it lol.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jun 25, 2011)

Sorry TrolleyDave I cannot reply to your criticisms right now because I am busy in something but I will surely reply u by the next week.............hope u understand........greetings.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jun 25, 2011)

Take your time.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 5, 2011)

<b>First Half</b>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I know Islam didn't invent polygamy. Using that line of defence is no different than saying "Well Islam might say this but look at what Christianity says". I really couldn't care less. Does Christianity still allow polygamy?

You're also repeating yourself. I've already agreed to everything you're saying. It has absolutely nothing to do with the point I'm making. The point I'm making is that this rule shows inequality towards women. The statistics have changed now. In many countries men outnumber women. If men are allowed to marry multiple wives in those circumstances then really shouldn't it be fair that women can have multiple husbands in the same circumstances? No provision was put in for this because the Qu'ran erringly believed that women would always outnumber men.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is what context is about,Allah had allowed polygamy at a time when women outnumbered men so we should practice it under same circumstances. 

I know polygamy is still practiced by some Muslims but those Muslims are ignorant and i think they fail to understand their Religion as well.These Muslims who do not fully understand their Religion call for Jihad which is self-struggle not human killing or any form of terrorism.
NOTEolygamy is not for sexual pleasure and fulfillment but is to support widows and helpless women.
As far as polyandry is concerned it is not allowed Islam(I have given some reasons to it).    



Spoiler



When the verse was revealed the companions of Muhammad, peace be upon him, did not run out with the attitude that they were going to get four wives all of a sudden. Some of them already had much more than that and these men had to divorce their wives, if they had more than four. So this was not an order to go out and get four wives. It was an order to begin limitations. And the first limitation was; No more than four.

Second, the limitation of equal treatment for all of them. How could a man keep more than one wife unless he was exceedingly wealthy and/or exceedingly strong and virile?

Next, the limitation very clearly states; ".. but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them) then only one ..."

Step by step, the men of Islam have come to be known today as the most monogamous of all men on earth (we only have one wife). Check for yourself and see. In the majority of all the Muslim homes on earth, a man gets married once, to one woman and then he stays married to her until the death of either himself or his wife.
Source: <a href="http://www.islamtomorrow.com/articles/marry_4_women_too.htm" target="_blank">http://www.islamtomorrow.com/articles/marry_4_women_too.htm</a>



According to Zakir Naik(It has some reasoning and facts):


Spoiler



The following points enumerate the reasons why polyandry is prohibited in Islam:

1. If a man has more than one wife, the parents of the children born of such marriages can easily be identified. The father as well as the mother can easily be identified. In case of a woman marrying more than one husband, only the mother of the children born of such marriages will be identified and not the father. Islam gives tremendous importance to the identification of both parents, mother and father. Psychologists tell us that children who do not know their parents, especially their father undergo severe mental trauma and disturbances. Often they have an unhappy childhood. It is for this reason that the children of prostitutes do not have a healthy childhood. If a child born of such wedlock is admitted in school, and when the mother is asked the name of the father, she would have to give two or more names! I am aware that recent advances in science have made it possible for both the mother and father to be identified with the help of genetic testing. Thus this point which was applicable for the past may not be applicable for the present.
2. Man is more polygamous by nature as compared to a woman.
3. Biologically, it is easier for a man to perform his duties as a husband despite having several wives. A woman, in a similar position, having several husbands, will not find it possible to perform her duties as a wife. A woman undergoes several psychological and behavioral changes due to different phases of the menstrual cycle.
4. A woman who has more than one husband will have several sexual partners at the same time and has a high chance of acquiring venereal or sexually transmitted diseases which can also be transmitted back to her husband even if all of them have no extra-marital sex. This is not the case in a man having more than one wife, and none of them having extra-marital sex.




<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No a Prophet cannot change any rule according to his will.This is what you believe about Muhammad(S.A.W) but the Quran itself states,
"Nor does he say anything of his own desire.It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him."(Surah An-Najm)


In your rush to defend Mohammed you've completely overlooked the point. The point I'm making is that there has to be a prophet to speak for God. Wihtout a prophet to speak for God then God can not change any of the rules/laws. God doesn't speak directly to people (not since the Old Testament), even Mohammed wasn't spoken to directly by God.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes,Not directly to Allah but through Angel Gabriel he received revelations.There is no need of changing these rules Allah has clearly stated that Quran is the complete guidance and the Book to mankind till eternity.

Allah actually did talk directly to Muhammad(S.A.W):
Shab-i-Miraj means the night of Ascent. It is the blessed night when the Holy Prophet of Islam was spiritually transported to heaven and he reached a high stage of nearness to God Almighty which is beyond ordinary human comprehension. The Ascent took place on 27th day or Rajab, 2 years before Hijra. The journey was not with a physical body but was a vision of the highest type. On the way the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, met Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and some other Prophets. The purpose of the Ascent was to confirm the high status of the Prophet of Islam, a position which all Muslims believe, is impossible to attain by any other human being. It is related that even Gabriel, the Angel who was accompanying the Holy Prophet remarked at one stage, 'I am forced to stop here. I cannot go any further, but you O Messenger of peace and friend of the Master of the worlds, continue your glorious ascent.'

It is also related that the Holy Prophet continued his journey until he reached very close to the Throne of God Almighty and attained the utmost nearness to Him. After having drunk fully at the Divine fountain of spiritual knowledge he came down to impart the knowledge to mankind.

It was on this journey, that five daily prayers were made obligatory upon Muslims.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've already seen those videos. The only people they'll convince are people who are already believers. They're not for convincing, they're for reassuring.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Which videos?....I only posted one single video

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Are you following Mohammed according to the teachings of the companions? Or according to the writings of Ibn Kathr or Al-Jalalayn? Or are you following modern interpretations of Islam like Pyrmon? Remember to follow true Islam you need to follow what Mohammed taught, and to know what Mohammed taught you have to get closer to his time - not further away.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

There is nothing bad in following his Companions................to get guidance we should follow them.Never heard of Ibn Kathr or Al-Jalalayn?I know that to understand his teachings i need to get closer to his time.....to have a better picture.


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I never used to keep records of these things (I have started doing it only recently) and can't find the Hadith I'm particularly thinking of, however I did find these showing Mohammed baring his stomach/abdomen and his thigh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This happened during the digging of a trench....when Muhammad(S.A.W) along with his companions dug a trench on the Syrian route to protect Madinah.Do you know how hot and dry it is in an area mostly arid or desert.There is also a tradition or something i don't clearly remember,people used to put stones on their abdominal part to lessen the severity of thirst,hunger and weakness.

Firstly:It happened during some constructional work or digging.
Secondly:This has nothing to do with men being allowed to roam with naked stomachs yet they can bare their stomachs during any heavy physical work.
Thirdly:Notice that his stomach was covered with earth meaning dust and was not clearly visible

Instead of noticing this you should have taken in to account his simplicity,hard work and commitment to work.Even being hailed as a Prophet and the Head of the State he accompanied his companions in digging of the trench.



Spoiler



Sahih Bukhari 1:8:367 - "Narrated 'Abdul 'Aziz: Anas said, 'When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, 'Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.' He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, 'Muhammad (has come).' (Some of our companions added, "With his army.") We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, 'O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.' The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Allah's Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.' So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.' Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her." Thabit asked Anas, "O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?" He said, "Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her." Anas added, "While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet . So the Prophet was a bridegroom and he said, 'Whoever has anything (food) should bring it.' He spread out a leather sheet (for the food) and some brought dates and others cooking butter. (I think he (Anas) mentioned As-SawTq). So they prepared a dish of Hais (a kind of meal). And that was Walrma (the marriage banquet) of Allah's Apostle .""



What should i do with this Hadith............there is nothing wrong with it.
He just uncovered his thigh!

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, here is a website talking about the Islamic dress code for men and women. According to the Shari'a a men need only cover navel/waist to knee. So there's no problem with men showing the abdomen according to it.

<a href="http://www.albalagh.net/food_for_thought/dress.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.albalagh.net/food_for_thought/dress.shtml</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Under normal conditions men don't have breasts like women.........I know there are some women who have smaller breasts then men but that is just a minority.A man gets attracted to women breasts but not women get attracted to men breasts.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yes I know you follow Allah. Allah is the Arabic word for God (although if you dig further into the history of the word you'll see it differently). This is the same god that the Christians and the Jews follow (also known as Yahweh). This particular god was first taught about by Abraham. Therefore it is the Abrahamic god. It's not a Hindu god, a Greek god, an Indian god, a Native American god, a Maori god, a Chinese god, a Japanese god etc. etc.

You might believe that you follow the one and only god, however so do all the other people following their religion. They believe you follow the wrong god just like you believe they follow the wrong god(s). This is also a very good indication that god(s) are man-made. Every ancient culture had their own particular god(s). This is because they saw things in their own particular way according the world around them. Think of it as humans first attempt at science and philosophy. There were other gods long before there was Allah/God/Yahweh. The first known recorded religion was the Sumerian religion, one which the Abrahamic faith borrows from quite extensively. In fact the whole idea in Islam of humans being slaves to their creator comes from the Sumerian religion. The flood myth also comes from the Sumerian religion, although it does have differences. The Sumerians also talk about their god having created the universe, as do the Chinese (Pangu/Jade Emperor), Greeks (Gaia), Hawaiian (Kumulipo) and many more.

Some of them also talk about how the heavens and the Earth were one and then broken apart, long before Islam and the other Judaic faiths came about. Islamic scholars and Muslims have been saying that about the Big Bang being in the Qu'ran long before science talked about it. Well that very same idea was in other religions before Islam. Just as most of the stuff in Islam was already previously talked about by other religions, scholars and just smart people in general.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is where you get Islam wrong.......Quran states that Islam existed the day the first human being was sent to earth that is why you find other Religions similar to it but those Religions were corrupted and people found their own ones.
Hazrat Isa(Jesus)(P.b.u.h) performed many miracles which have been witnessed by many people.How can a human perform these miracles?
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_of_Jesus" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_of_Jesus</a>

How Humans came into existence was there a sperm and an ovum or something like that.
What does Science say about this?


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Prophet Muhammad was an illiterate man who had no formal education in any science, language, religious or secular.


When it speaks about "unlettered man" in the Qu'ran it doesn't necessarily mean that Mohammed was illiterate, it could just be referring to him having no formal education. I've had little formal education, I never finished school. It however hasn't stopped me learning lots of information since. You don't have to go to a school to learn things. Mohammed was a trader who regularly went on trading expeditions while married to his first wife. There was ample opportunity for him to pick up any information.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Muhammad(S.A.W) had received no formal education.

This is something you assume about Muhammad(S.A.W) that he went on trade journeys and learned about other Religions and created Islam.You just totally ignored the titles he received,Al-Sadiq and Al-Amin,for his truthfulness and trustworthiness.Why would a person lie after being so truthful whole his life.

Quran speaks about a variety of branches of science like: Astronomy, Embryology, Hydrology, Geology, Sociology, Psychology, Oceanography, Law etc. including lots of scientific statements that were validated only recently and were not known in the time of the prophet.


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->All of the stuff that you mentioned was known during the time of Mohammed, most of it long before. Even alot of the laws in the Shari'a. There is very little in the Qu'ran that is original. Study something other than Islam (and information from Islamic scholars) and you'll see this. If you care to post what you think wasn't known or thought of at the time of Mohammed I can show you the evidence that disproves it, including where he got things wrong.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

If it was known long before Quran came then why were the people amused at these verses.There was not just a single trader at that time.....there were plenty of them.They would have known that Muhammad(S.A.W) is just making up a Religion.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It was not known about prophet Muhammad any scholarly tendencies or achievements until the age of forty (when he received the first verses of Quran). So, how this illiterate man suddenly brings about a book like the Quran including an ideological and religious revolution that changed history?

He didn't suddenly bring about the Qu'ran tho did he. The Qu'ran wasn't revealed all in one go, it was revealed over the space of 22 years. So Mohammed had plenty of time to speak to others and learn from them. He had amongst his followers doctors, scientists and scholars so there was no problem with learning information from them.

As for how he could write the religious text. He learned Christianity from his Aunt I believe it was, other relatives followed an offshoot of the Abrahamic faith (one that Islam borrows alot from including some of the Shari'a punsihments) and there was also a large Jewish community.

Ideological ideas? That's pretty simple as well. Most of the government ideology came later on in the Qu'ran, when he actually had enough followers to start being considered a power. Alot of the ideas he had actually come from Jewish ideas (social security, zakat, no interest etc), some came from the ideas of people like Plato and many other sources.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It wasn't even possible for anyone to just bring Quran in one day.During his Prophethood in Mecca he mostly had poor people as his followers as far as i know there weren't any doctors, scientists and scholars during his early Prophethood.
It was obvious that the government ideology was laid when it was needed as such in Madinah when he was crowned as the Head of the State.
It weren't his ideas...these were the revelations sent down to him which had been sent to previous Messengers as well but their message had been distorted that is why you find similarities in other Religions. 

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), if he authored the Quran, honor the virgin Mary (May Allah be pleased with her), the mother of Jesus (peace be on him) as the best woman over all women on earth over all ages until day of judgment (an honor that even not offered by the bible) while not mentioning his own family members with a single word and even not mentioning any name of them.?


If he'd have said he wrote he would have been no different than anyone else at the time. He also would have not have been paid attention to by many because of his uneducated status.

Then you also have the fact that he was hoping to get the local Jews and Christians to follow him. If he'd have claimed that he wrote the Qu'ran rather than the Abrahamic god then none of them would have listened to him, let alone follow him. Plus, if the book comes from God then questioning it is blasphemous and could send you to hell (this is even stated in the Qu'ran itself - doubt will send you to hell).

There are many many many many reasons why he said it was from the Abrahamic god rather than himself.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I think he could have easily claimed himself god and get enough followers.Teachings matter more than status.Poor people could have easily believed him as he talked of Equality and Rights.His personality was more than enough to cover uneducated status.

Quran taught that Jesus was not more than a Prophet and there were many Prophets before him,which contradicted with the Christians Belief of god.This shows that he wasn't even eager to attract followers to Islam moreover this shows he didn't even create this Religion.

There are many people in History who claimed themselves to be god even if they didn't had power and wealth but they still got a considerable number of believers:
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_have_been_considered_deities" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_peopl...sidered_deities</a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If he had authored the Quran, why he didn't claim this authorship of Quran and consequently gaining higher prestige among his followers who may consider him as a God.


What higher prestige is their than being a prophet of the Abrahamic god? None of his followers would have considered him a god, he would have been thought of as a clever man similar to Plato or Socrates. Plus being a prophet of God gave him more power and authority. People are likely to question a mans authority and decision but not so quick to question a gods authority and decision. Are you willing to question any of the things in the Qu'ran? No ask yourself, if Mohammed claimed authorship of the Qu'ran would you be willing to question any of the things in it?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

We don't question God right, then if Muhammad(S.A.W) claimed himself god then why would any one question him.Quran did not come directly from Allah but Muhammad(S.A.W) revealed it to us and no one questioned him because everyone even one of his bitterest enemies Abu Jahl knew that he was the real Messenger.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why he mentioned Quran verses that reprimand him (as that of chapter 33, verse 37 and chapter 80 verses 1-3) if he wrote Quran by himself?.

Source:http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_Quran_the_true_word_of_God


What about the verses that give him special permissions? And what about the verses that told off his wives (including telling them that God would make Mohammed divorce his wives and give them better ones)? There were plenty of times that God was quick to bestow favours upon him.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

He was Allah's Messenger so even if Allah did favor him then what is wrong with it.His Caliber and Status was far above ours.
Even if the verses weren't favoring him u would make it look like that they were!!! 

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->including telling them that God would make Mohammed divorce his wives and give them better ones<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Please post this verse and do remember to take context into account.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There treatment is the same as treatment of Non-Muslims(who aren't slaves).


Are non-Muslim slaves allowed to marry?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Even Muslim slaves were not allowed to marry until they were released as far as I know....so maybe the same will go to them as well.
Sorry but I don't remember any verse for this in particular.....if u know do let me know.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slavery is unjust, immoral and inhumane according to it's general statement or meaning or that practiced by Non-Muslims but it's not the same taking in consideration the description laid by Islam.

You previously said that slaves were like video games and pets but this was not the way they were treated...............to find out this you need to re-read Islamic


Again, you're missing the point entirely. I have said over and over that treatment means nothing. The idea of a human being owned by another human being is immoral, unjust and inhumane. Not the actual treatment but the actual ownership. You keep presenting them like they are just staff or workers, however staff and workers have the choice to quit there jobs - slaves do not. Mohammed even stated in the Hadith that a runaway slave will go to hell.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Slavery is inhumane,immoral and unjust according to It's general statement but in Islam there is no foundation or definition which implies this meaning.They are considered Equal and part of the Society.It seems that you only have problem with Slavery itself but not the Slavery in Islam but u don't have to worry about it now as slavery is no longer practiced.

Muhammad(S.A.W) also stated in an Hadith that if a slave demands freedom he should be freed

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->From the Tafsir of al-Jalalayn :

Men are in charge of, they have authority over, women, disciplining them and keeping them in check, because of that with which God has preferred the one over the other, that is, because God has given them the advantage over women, in knowledge, reason, authority and otherwise, and because of what they expend, on them [the women], of their property. Therefore righteous women, among them, are obedient, to their husbands, guarding in the unseen, that is, [guarding] their private parts and otherwise during their spouses’ absence, because of what God has guarded, for them, when He enjoined their male spouses to look after them well. And those you fear may be rebellious, disobedient to you, when such signs appear, admonish them, make them fear God, and share not beds with them, retire to other beds if they manifest such disobedience, and strike them, but not violently, if they refuse to desist [from their rebellion] after leaving them [in separate beds]. If they then obey you, in what is desired from them, do not seek a way against them, a reason to strike them unjustly. God is ever High, Great, so beware of Him, lest He punish you for treating them unjustly.


It clearly states that husbands are allowed to strike their wives for disobedience.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What is Tafsir of al-Jalalayn?
Well this note seems unjust......is it written by an extremist?
It has been written as if Men are the Masters and Women are there slaves.I don't think it holds any weight age in some points.
It also contradicts with the Quran.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 5, 2011)

<b>Second Half</b>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The very first verses that you quoted about questioning the Prophet(S.A.W) have again been twisted out of context.The Prophet(S.A.W) had always consulted his companions in all matters(such as battle of Trench and Uhud).He always took the views of other people into consideration.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

They weren't taken out of context at all. He may have consulted his compnaions in all matters, but ultimately they had to obey and follow him.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes and was there any decision with which his followers suffered..........and consultation is not a small thing for a leader to do and listen to the majority.Let me ask you does President Obama consult people and listen to the majority?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is again a self opinion about Muhammad and the verse.Were u inside Muhammad(S.A.W) or could read his heart and feelings to tell that he was annoyed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't need to read his heart and feelings. The verse states what it does. Do not annoy the prophet. If he was the perfect man and the role model for all time being annoyed by questions shouldn't have been part of his personality.

Let me give you another chapter to go look at objectively. Do you know the reasons behind the chapter Al-Tahrim?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You just quoted verses and gave your view or interpretation of the verse.You didn't even quote one question that was left unanswered.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What does that even have to do with it? The fact of the matter is the verse says not to ask complicated questions. Would you ask Mohammed difficult questions after the revealing of this verse or would you obey God?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

If a person really had doubts about Islam then why would he convert.Yes it was not possible for Muhammad(S.A.W)
to answer each and every question.....that is why Quran was revealed to answer all the queries people had.As time passed on people got the answers to their questions because it was not possible for Muhammad(S.A.W) to answer them at that time.

Yes tell what are the reasons behind Surah Al-Tahrim(Prohibition)?

Allah did not allow people to ask complicated questions because Muhammad(S.A.W) himself wasn't aware of these because the verses were slowly revealing to him and he passed them on.He obviously wasn't born with all the knowledge.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is again a twist of words.Quran clearly states that they were the Mothers of the Faithful.All his wives were a complete guidance for women to follow.They were the women of great knowledge and dignity.Even the Prophet's companions consulted them and learned from them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It's not a twist of words at all. Why would marrying someone else, some like say Abu Bakr, stop them from being the mothers of the faithful? Why would them getting remarried affect anything at all as long as they married good men?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Would you marry your mother?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If Muhammad(S.A.W)'s wives knew his secrets then why would they remain Muslims.They would have told everyone after his death that he wasn't a true Messenger.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Because it gave them power and privilege. Why would a Queen give up her kingdom?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And why would a Queen keep a throne of falsehood and no real treasure even by spending her life according to it.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's not that Allah needs booty.It means to spend the booty in His way(ex:helping poor,widows and orphans).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Why not just use the words "For Allah", why "For Allah and his Messenger"?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

In many places it has been stated that "For Allah" means to spend in His way.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For not misbehaving but committing a sin because they were the Mothers of the Faithful.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Misbehaving and sin are the same thing to me. Why should they get punished double though? If they committed a sin and then repented it would be much more valuable as a role than someone who didn't commit sin because they were fearful of being flogged to death.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

They were the ones to set an example for future Muslim generations......if they had committed sins wouldn't you question the validity of Islam.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If he gets caught up,then the people there were fool enough to again believe in him after this verse.....Can you please quote the verse about which the Quran is talking about.

I'll go one better. I'll present you with the Tafsir of Al-Wahidi explaining why the verse was revealed.

(And when We put a revelation in place of (another) revelation…) [16:101-102]. This verse was revealed when the idolaters said: “Muhammad is mocking his Companions; one day he commands them to do something and the next day he forbids them from doing it, or brings instead something which is easier. He is nothing but a calumniator who says things of his own invention”, and so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse and the verse after it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Well I think it no more than another assumption........I know the idolaters would have been talking about the change of Qiblah and some other things like this.

Tell me the things in particular which he made easier or changed....I'll try to make u understand why it happened.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*snipped out video of Zakir Naik<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Once again Zakir Naik doing what he does best, avoiding the issue by talking lots of nonsense about everything other than the subject. Here's an experiment for you to try. Go outside during the sunset and tell me what you see. You'll see the sun setting in the horizon, a horizon that is so distant you can not make out the details. So unless the guy the verse is talking about had telescopic vision then the Sun could not look like it was setting in a muddy pool.

<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Why can't you just accept the reality and stop insulting others.....i know why do you think he is speaking all nonsense because it goes all against your beliefs.

Here i have something not said by Zakir Naik(I hope it fulfills you criticisms):



Spoiler



The verse says, "he found it set in a spring of murky water" i.e., according to his vision and sight that's why Allah does not say "it is setting".
Imam Al-Baidawi notes,
He probably reached shore of the ocean and saw it like that because there was but water at the furthest of his sight that's why He says "he found it set" and does not say "it sets". (Al-Baidawi, Anwar-ut-Tanzil wa Asrar-ut-Taw'il, Volume 3, page 394. Published by Dar-ul-Ashraf, Cairo, Egypt)

Imam Al-Qurtubi states,

Al-Qaffal said: It is not meant by reaching the rising or setting of the sun that he reached its body and touched it because it runs in the sky around the earth without touching it and it is too great to enter any spring on earth. It is so much larger than earth. But it is meant that he reached the end of populated land east and west, so he found it - according to his vision - setting in a spring of a murky water like we watch it in smooth land as if it enters inside the land. That is why He said, "he found it rising on a people for whom we had provided no covering protection against the sun." (Holy Qur'ân 18:90) and did not mean that it touches or adheres to them; but they are the first to rise on.
Al-Qutabiy said: Probably this spring is a part of the sea and the sun sets behind, with or at it, so the proposition takes the place of an adjective and Allah knows best. (Al-Qurtubi, Al-Game' le Ahkam-el-Qur'an, Volume 16, page 47. Published by Dar-ul-Hadith, Cairo, Egypt. ISBN 977-5227-44-5)
Imam Fakhr-ud-Deen Ar-Razi states,

When Zul-Qarnain reached the furthest west and no populated land was left, he found the sun as if it sets in a dark spring, but it is not in reality. The same when sea traveler sees the sun as if it sets in the sea if he cannot see the shore while in reality it sets behind the sea. (Ar-Razi, At-Tafsir-ul-Kabir, Volume 21, page 166)

Imam Ibn Kathir states,

"Until, when he reached the setting of the sun" means he followed a certain way till he reached the furthest land he could go from the west. As for reaching the setting of the sun in the sky, it is impossible. What narrators and story tellers say about that he walked for a period of time in earth while the sun was setting behind him is unreal, and most of it is from myths of People of the Book and inventions of their liars.
"he found it set in a spring of murky water" means he saw the sun according to his vision setting in the ocean and this is the same with everyone ending to the shore seeing as if the sun sets inside it (i.e. the ocean).
(Ibn Kathir, Tafsir-ul-Qur'ân Al-'Azim, Volume 5, page 120. Published by Maktabat-ul-Iman, Mansoura,Egypt)
I believe this is adequate to refute the missionaries' imposed interpretation. And to Allah is the Judgement in all affairs.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jul 7, 2011)

<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ok, let me make it easier for you then.  The Qu'ran says it's alright to strike your wife if she's disobedient.  Is the Qu'ran wrong for stating this?  Should a husband have the right to strike his wife?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As to those women on whose part you see ill¬conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly, if it is useful), but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance). Surely, Allâh is Ever Most High, Most Great.
The word "beat" is the Arabic "idribuhunna", derived from the root "daraba". "Daraba" can have many different meanings, but I will only talk about the three most used. 1) Giving an example, 2) beat, 3) leave. The first meaning, giving an example, makes no sense. So the verse either says to leave her or beat her. Couple that fact with all the verses that says that mercy and forgiveness is always the better option, that one cannot treat his spouse with harshness and that the relationship should be based on love and tranquility. I'll assume it means to leave her. Now, I know very well you'll tell me that that is not what mainstream Islam preaches or that Muhammad did this or that or something like that. Just know I don't care.

<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It could get clearer by saying "Unless these circumstances apply". lol  As it stands that verse is open to a multiple amount of interpretations, as is evidenced by the sheer number of interpretations.  Suggesting someone can't do something isn't the same as telling someone not to do something.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not really. It says <b>If</b> you fear of being unjust with orphans, then marry up to four times, but you have to be perfectly just and equitable. Then it says you cannot be just however you try. I simply don't see other interpretations.

<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So you could care less what Mohammed taught?  Because Mohammed most definitely did not teach that polygamy was only to be followed under those circumstances.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, I could care less about things Muhammad supposedly taught. They are in no way reliable.

<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's where you're wrong about the Hadiths.  Yes they were compiled over 200 years later but they were not however written then.  There are many many many hadiths written from prior and just after Mohammeds death.  The first attempt at collecting the Hadiths was by Uthman himself during the compilation of the Qu'ran.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ahem:

Traditions of the life of Muhammad and the early history of Islam were passed down mostly orally for more than a hundred years after Muhammad's death in AD 632. Muslim historians say that Caliph Uthman ibn Affan (the third khalifa (caliph) of the Rashidun Empire, or successor of Muhammad, who had formerly been Muhammad's secretary), was the first to urge Muslims to record the hadith. Uthman's labours were cut short by his assassination, at the hands of aggrieved soldiers, in 656. <b>No sources survive directly from this period so we are dependent on what later writers tell us about this period.</b>

Directly from Wikipedia.

<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And how are you so sure that what Muslims are taught today is wrong?  What makes you so sure that your Islam is the right one?  You're not following what Mohammed taught, you're making your own interpretation of the Qu'ran and following that.  As for all prophets being equal, that's not entirely true.  The Qu'ran states that Mohammed is a special prophet with privileges that no other prophet has/had.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Simple, the Qur'an and, ironically, some Hadith say not to follow the Hadith. Few interpretation was needed to build my point of view. It's pretty clear. 
Oh yeah? Where in the Qur'an does it say Muhammad is in any way superior to other prophets? All I see are the parts where it says not to compare prophets with one another.

<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If Mohammed is also the embodiment of the ideals of Islam then it means that the Wahabbi/Salafi are correct in their interpretation of the Qu'ran.  They attempt to follow Islam as preached about by Mohammed and the companions.  This means killing people who speak out against Mohammed (Qu'ran 9:24), it means sex with slaves without marriage is fine (Chapter Al-Tahrim). marrying pre-pubescent girls is fine (his marriage to Aisha), hitting a woman is acceptable (Mohammed struck Aisha for spying on him), slaughtering an entire tribe of people through beheading is fine (Bani Qurayzi) and the list goes on.  Do you think it's acceptable to marry a 6 year old girl, if not then why not?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, it means to try to emulate Muhammad, through his Sunnah. But his Sunnah is the Qur'an. By representing the ideals of the Qur'an, his Sunnah is the one the Qur'an describes. And the Hadith are also banned several times in the Qur'an, so Muslims can't do any of the things you described. And 9:24 has nothing to do with Muhammad.


<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I didn't.  I posted the ones relevant to showing that Islam accepts slavery as a social norm.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



But those who divorce their wives by Zihar, then wish to go back on the words they uttered― (it is ordained that such a one) <b>should free a slave</b> before they touch each other: this are ye admonished to perform: and Allah is well-acquainted with (all) that ye do. (3)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, it says to free a slave as punishment for going back on your word.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



Allah will not call you to account for what is void in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed then indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or <b>give a slave his freedom</b>. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth Allah make clear to you His Signs, that ye may be grateful. (89)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, so once again it's telling Muslims to free a slave as a punishment for something they've done wrong.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allâh enriches them of His Bounty. <b>And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allâh which He has bestowed upon you.</b> And force not your maids to prostitution, if they desire chastity, in order that you may make a gain in the (perishable) goods of this worldly life. But if anyone compels them (to prostitution), then after such compulsion, Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to those women, i.e. He will forgive them because they have been forced to do this evil act unwillingly). (33)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, and what happens if the master decides that there is nothing good and honest in the slave?  It doesn't say that they if a slave asks for freedom it must be granted, it leaves it up to the discretion of the slave owner.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and <b>to free the slaves</b> and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise. (60)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Read the Tafsirs of this verse.  What it's talking about here are the slaves who have entered into a contract to buy their freedom and supplying money towards it and this is in the hope of encouraging them to become Muslim.  So any slave who looks like he will never embrace Islam will not be party to this "charity".

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->



Spoiler



It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and <b>to set slaves free</b>; and observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are they who are sincere. Such are the God-fearing. (177)


<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Once again when you consult the teachings of Mohammed and his companions you find that what it's talking about here is manumitted slaves who are likely to become Muslim.

Now show me the verses that talk about unconditional release of all slaves and that owning a slave is immoral.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First, you are still going about with the Hadith. However much you use them in this debate(with me, at least), know I'll simply dismiss it.
Second, slavery was an accepted institution in the Arabian peninsula and had been for centuries. You can't get rid of such a big institution in a couple of years. It had to be done progressively. You know, baby steps. Little by little slavery would eventually disappear. It simply wouldn't have worked to release all the slaves all at the same time. Trying to convince an Arab of this would have been impossible. Look at some old geezers who still have the racist mentality of the olden days. These things take time.

<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And Mohammed also promoted the taking of female captives as war booty.  This was a privlege not just for him but for anyone that fought in battle.  This is how most slaves came to be in the Muslims posession at the time.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You base this on the Hadith. The Qur'an says to either free captives or ransom them. I only follow the Qur'an. 

<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Read Al-Tahrim and then tell me that no sexual contact is authorised unless a marriage has taken place.  Also verse 23:6 says "Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed -"

Notice how the wives and slaves are an 'or" situation.  In otherwords no marriage with the slave needs to take place for the slave owner to have sex with them.  Show me the passage that states that a man must marry his slave to be able to have sex with her.

The Qu'ran also states that a slave girl should be treated like a wife.  And what does the Qu'ran say about a wife refusing sex with her husband?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First, 4:25 clearly states that it is lawful to marry ma malakat aymanukum. If it's lawful to marry them, then marriage is necessary for sexual intercourse.
Second, this is assuming Ma malakat aymanukum means slave. Thing is, it can mean one who you are engaged with, it can mean a marriage that was done before Muhammad and doesn't respect the regulations set by the Qur'an(which obviously don't exist anymore). By taking 4:25 into account, it makes more sense to assume Ma malakat aymanukum does not mean slave.


<!--quoteo(post=3728770:date=Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 21 2011, 04:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3728770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's a very noble thought, and I congratulate you for wanting it to say that but the fact of the matter is that it doesn't.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Or does it?


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 8, 2011)

<b>Third Half</b>

There are no Scientific Errors in Quran(The Validity of Embryology):
<a href="http://www.answering-christianity.com/nadeem_embryology.htm" target="_blank">http://www.answering-christianity.com/nadeem_embryology.htm</a>

Actually I know very less about Embryology but still I have tried to search and find a better rebuttal to your criticism.
All criticisms have been answered in the above link.

U had stated that Islam borrows almost every thing from other Religions and Greek Philosophers.........no one at that time could understand Ancient Greek philosophy,also written Arabic was not common.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1) The Abrahamic god isn't the only god to have claimed to have created the universe.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't need to know this as I don't care or even bother about other gods.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->2) Islam (or even Judaism) wasn't the first religion to claim that a god had created a "canopy" above us to protect us.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Then which Religion was it and also provide evidence for the validity of your claim.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->3) The roots of mountains don't actually pin down the crusts of the Earth. Plus, other Greek philosophers proposed the idea that mountains had roots centuries before Islam.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

When did they propose and was it exactly the same?

Mountains having routes doesn't mean that the roots are identical to the roots plants have.
Mountains do have roots and it was discovered late after the Quran was revealed and the mountains also stabilize the earth:
<a href="http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/gsl/pid/6565;jsessionid=8D8939F978E21CF0FD60668C9667C1E3" target="_blank">http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/gsl/pid/6565;jse...D60668C9667C1E3</a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->4) Other religions also stated a similar theory to the creation of the universe in Islam that could be interpreted to be talking about the Big Bang.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Those Religions have a similar theory but not exactly the same as Islam......please also name those Religions.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And none of it corrects the problem that I pointed out about the Sun being on the orbital trajectory as the Moon.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Here:
Astronomers found that the moon’s movement is 18 kilometers per second, while the Earth’s is 15 kilometers and the sun’s is 12 kilometers .
The sun, earth & moon all move & the distance between them is stable and regularized.
This was explained in the Holy Quran fourteen centuries ago.
The Holy Quran says “And the sun Runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him) the exalted in Might, the All Knowing. And the moon we have measured for her Mansions (to traverse) Till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date – stalk. It is not permitted to the sun to catch up the moon, nor can the night outstrip the day: Each (just) swims along in (its own orbit) (According to Law) [36:38-40].
Here Allah the Excelled in might says “And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him” Then He says “ It is not permitted to the sun to catch-up the moon”.
This means that the moon is meant to be before the sun where as the sun runs and can not catch up it. Because the speed of the moon is 18 kilometers & that of the earth is 15 kilometers while that of the sun is 12 kilometers. No matter how fast the sun move, it will not overtake the moon. But what makes the moon retain its mansions while it can leave them? The astronomers found that the moon runs in a zigzag swing and not in a straightforward line. The moon runs in this manner to retain its mansions and locations.
In this manner Allah the only creator organized and systemized the orbiting & more movements of all of them so that they retain their orbiting traces & do not depart them.
Therefore, we have the regular succession of Night & Daytime, seasons etc….
Don’t you think it is an excellent determination?
Is it possible that it has come only by chance?
No, it has not come by chance because chance cannot create such excellent & systematic norms of the universe.
Allah has created all this & creates this systemic cosmic norms.

Source: “The Age of Faith has dawned” By: Shaikh Abdel Majeed Elzindani

Read more: <a href="http://www.city-data.com/forum/religion-philosophy/319518-science-leads-islam-moon-sun-islamic.html#ixzz1RSGCsGYK" target="_blank">http://www.city-data.com/forum/religion-ph...l#ixzz1RSGCsGYK</a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Of course He is capable of all things but it has not been mentioned that which capabilities He uses.
(Allah Knows Best)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

He is the Almighty Allah and He decides which capability to use not me or you.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So you agree then that the Qu'ran is wrong when it says that it's impossible for God to have a Son? And I noticed you completely skipped over the part about the Qu'ran being wrong about what Christians worship.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't agree and secondly Quran says, "He begets not nor is He begotten" it does not say that it is impossible for Him.
Actually I have no knowledge of Christian Worship.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That only gives a hint towards dinosaurs being mentioned if you want to read that into it. As Muslims say, context is everything. When not taken out of context this passage is obviously talking about regular animals.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->



Spoiler



The reason people are not finding a verse about dinosaurs could be due to the fact that they haven't understood the entire Quran. Also, lots of people would just say it's not there because they haven't seen it or read the Quran entirely while understanding it 100% to be able to say it does.

The term 'dinosaur' is also the modern word of what those creatures were called thousands of years ago. We do not know what those creatures were referred to exactly, but we can only study the Quran further to make that decision, if it indeed exists in the Quran.

For an example, a lot of people used the excuse of how there is no verse that implies that women have to wear the Hijab (headscarf) and point out only one ayah (verse) that tells women to dress modestly. Of course, that is based on their knowledge of the Quran, little do they know that there exists two more versus that relate to the Headscarf and makes it compulsory. Just because they don't know about it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Everyday or every decade, we discover something new. Whether it be a more clear understanding of what we thought a verse meant, or a complete shift in our views. Islam is over 1400 years old, and to this day we still find something new out, and we still don't completely understand the Quran. Some verses have literal implications, others an underlining meaning or message.

Now, that does not prove that there is a verse about dinosaurs in the Quran, but suggests that it may actually exist in the Quran but has not yet been identified. We do not know what God refers to as 'dinosaurs' in the Quran, but we do know that there is a verse that discusses 'giant creatures/beasts (Dabbah)' in verse 2:164 from the Holy Quran: "...in the beasts of all kinds that He scatters through the earth...are signs for a people that are wise"

The same word 'Dabbah' is used the in the verse 24:45: "And God has created every animal from water: of them are some that creep on their bellies; some that walk on two legs; and some that walk on four. God creates what he wills..." There is another verse in the Quran that I found very interesting - Al-Araf:56 "work not confusion in the earth after the fair ordering thereof" which describes how the earth had been "repaired/reordered/restored", suggesting there had been commotion or some problematic event on earth and was restored. It warns the believers to not cause confusion on earth.

Then again, that could mean a whole different thing. But, I do believe, even though the Quran is meant mainly to guide the believers, that there may be some verse that might further explain life millions of years ago. That's my opinion.

Sorry the English translation doesn't flow or make as much sense as the actual Arabic text from the Quran, it's quite difficult to explain precisely.

I suggest you have a look at this website for further details:

<a href="http://www.answering-christianity.com/di…" target="_blank">http://www.answering-christianity.com/di…</a>

Source:http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080705131531AAdF8RT



<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So God knows that you will suffer an eternity of torment and torture beyond your wildest imgination and still allows you to be born. Where's the compassion in that?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Allah knows that if u follow the right path something good will happen to you(Paradise) and if you follow the wrong path something bad will happen to you(Hell) because He has given Humans free will.
Prayers and good deeds are something which can re-write your fate.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->How is burning someone in fire for eternity just treatment?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Then which just treatment should be given?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Boiling water is used to describe Hell in the Quran even if it does not mention it there are plenty of other things that it has mentioned:
<a href="http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm" target="_blank">http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm</a>
And none of it is anything that wasn't already known at the time.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You will say and i will believe!!!Sorry! but this is not the case.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Does the verse say that the stars were in our solar system and does it mention about the moon being along or leveled with them.......The stars could be above the moon.
I will search on this and try to give you a better explanation.
(Allah Knows Best)

It says the moon is in the midst of the stars. To be in the midst of something it must be surrounded by other things. <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/midst" target="_blank">http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/midst</a>

It also claims that the Sun and the stars are seperate objects. However in reality the Sun is a star. Would the creator of the universe not know this?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Please quote the verses again.


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Muhammad(S.A.W) had not married the girl on his own but his friend Abu Bakr wanted him to marry his daughter Aisha.He used to play with Aisha until she had reached puberty and attained maturity.This does set an example for future Muslims but not to marry small children but to marry anyone seeing his virtue and the degree of piety.

I don't know who told you that but it's not the truth.

Sahih Bukhari 7:62:18 - "Narrated 'Ursa:The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage.Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.""

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#007.062.018" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#007.062.018</a>

Mohammed says God showed her to him in a dream.

Sahih Bukhari 9:87:140 - "Narrated 'Aisha: Allah's Apostle said to me, "You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, 'Uncover (her),' and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.' Then you were shown to me, the angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said (to him), 'Uncover (her), and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.'
<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#009.087.140" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#009.087.140</a>

So no, that's not what it was an example of. Now ask yourself this question, why would an all-knowing god tell a prophet to do something that is so immoral? And why would he tell a prophet to do something that he knew would become incredibly distasteful, if not repulsive, to the average man 1400 years later?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Firstly:no one is sure about her age that is why many historians debate over it.
Secondly: Hadith are not always authentic (For Example:if they contradict with the Quran or Muslim's basic belief).
Thirdly:There is nothing immoral about it.
Thank you for telling me that Hazrat Muhammad(S.A.W) had proposed Hazrat Aisha 


Spoiler



1. Prophet had sent the formal proposal to her father which he did not accepted immediately. He has two issues with the proposal. One is that her father was close friend of Prophet Mohammed PBUH and in Arab society close friends are considered brothers. So, he had this doubt that Ayesh will be like niece of Prophet, which prophet explained that this kind of prohibition come only from blood relationship. Second issue was that she was already engaged to another man and her father did not wanted to break promise. However, this engagement was broken by father of the boy and only after that marriage proposal was accepted. Now, in the whole story issue of age does not come into consideration at all. Her father did not said anything about her age. So, age was not at all the problem at that time.
2. He first married to a woman who was 40 yo and he was 25 at that time.
When his first wife passed away he married to Lady Ayesh. He lived with a woman who was 15 years older than himself for 25 years.
3. Prophet Mohammed PBUH has been criticize and literally mentally tortured by his opponents. They were waiting if he make any mistake and they make big scandal out of it. His opponents never criticised him for marrying Ayesha
4. After the death of Prophet Mohammed PBUH, ayesha never compalined about any mistreatment and abuse. She live happily with Prophet during their marriage life.
5. Ayesha is a major resource of Isamic knowledge as she learned from Prophet directly and lived very long after his death.
6. It is said that marriage was consummated at the age of six. Now, the word "consummation" is not an Arabic word. This has to be understood as per Arabic custom. Reality is they started living together when she was 9. Now, if they really had sex, is something purely based on our imagination. Further, if she was not matured enough at that age she must have gone through great trauma which did not happened with her
<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081012203456AAxxJWD" target="_blank">http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...12203456AAxxJWD</a>



<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->incredibly distasteful, if not repulsive<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is not the same with everyone.
Some men still marry younger women and some women still marry younger men.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Read 33:37 in the Qu'ran. Here is the Tafsir explaining it.

And when (idh is dependent because of [an implied preceding] udhkur, ‘mention [when]’) you said to him to whom God had shown favour, by [guiding him to] Islam, and to whom you [too] had shown favour: by manumitting him — this was Zayd b. Hāritha, who had been a prisoner of war before [the coming of] Islam (in the period of al-jāhiliyya). The Messenger of God (s) purchased him before his call to prophethood, and then manumitted him and adopted him as his son — ‘Retain your wife for yourself and fear God’, before divorcing her. But you had hidden in your heart what God was to disclose, [what] He was to manifest of your love for her and of [the fact] that should Zayd part with her you would marry her, and you feared people, would say, ‘He has married his son’s wife!’, though God is worthier that you should fear Him, in all things, so take her in marriage and do not be concerned with what people say. Zayd subsequently divorced her and her [obligatory] waiting period was completed. God, exalted be He, says: So when Zayd had fulfilled whatever need he had of her, We joined her in marriage to you — the Prophet consummated his marriage with her without [the customary] permission [from her legal guardian] and gratified the Muslims with [a feast of] bread and meat — so that there may not be any restriction for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have fulfilled whatever wish they have of them. And God’s commandment, that which He has decreed, is bound to be realised.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->



Spoiler



Some of the Prophet's marriages were for legislative reasons and to abolish certain corrupt traditions. Such was his marriage to Zaynab, divorcee of the freed slave Zayd. Before Islam, the Arabs did not allow divorcees to remarry.
Zayd was adopted by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and called his son as was the custom among the Arabs before Islam. But Islam abrogated this custom and disapproved of its practice.
Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) was the first man to express this disapproval in a practical way. So he married the divorcee of his "adopted" son to show that adoption does not really make the adopted child a real son of the adopting father and also to show that marriage is lawful for divorcees.
Incidentally, this very Zaynab was Muhammad's cousin, and had been offered to him in marriage before she married Zayd. He refused her then, but after she was divorced he accepted her for the two legislative purposes: the lawful marriage of divorcees and the real status of adopted children.

Several things point to the lack of truth in this story. First, it is unlikely that the prophet (pbuh) was suddenly struck by Zainab's beauty. Zainab was his cousin. He had known her since childhood. Why would she suddenly appear striking after she was already married to another?

Second, the prophet had arranged for her to get married to Zaid. If there was to be an attraction why did the prophet (pbuh) not encourage her to marry none but himself?

Third, the fact of the matter was that Zaid's marriage proved to be an unhappy one. Zaid was a former slave and as such was held in low esteem in the eyes of Zainab. He mentioned to the prophet that he intended to divorce his wife. But the prophet advised him to keep his wife and avoid divorce.

In the meantime, Zaid intended to divorce his wife, Allah intended to marry her to the prophet. Eventually Zaid could maintain his marriage no longer. He divorced Zainab and Allah declared in his Glorious Book that he has wedded her to the prophet after the proper waiting period was over.

This marriage served more than one purpose. First, the prophet was responsible for arranging Zainab's marriage to Zaid. In a sense, then, he was also indirectly responsible for the unhappiness she felt in her marriage. Her marriage to the prophet now provided her the honour she felt she deserved, and exonerated the prophet.

Second, Zaid had been adopted as the prophet's son. Eventually, however, the Qur'an prohibited the practice of changing the parental identity of adopted persons. Zaid, then, was to no longer be called "son of Muhammad" but rather "a close friend." The prophet's marriage to the divorced wife of Zaid was a practical demonstration that the adopted relationship was not equal to a real blood-relationship. A man cannot marry the divorced wife of his real son but he can marry the divorced wife of his adopted son.

The abolishment of the age-old practice was a positive improvement for the adopted persons. People outside of Islam still continue this practice for their own benefit. They adopt children and rob them of their real identify, making them believe they are real children of the household in which they grow up. When such children realize the truth they suffer much disappointment and grief. The adoptive process continues for the selfish gain of the adoptive parents.

But is it not true that children sometimes need adoptive parents? Yes. But they also need to preserve their real identify. This is what Islam ensures. It is the responsibility of the entire community to help children in need. They should be taken in and nurtured but not confused with one's own children.

The prophet's marriage to Zainab was a bold measure to forever engrave in the minds of his followers that as much as people would resist change, some changes are worth the effort. Adoptive children should no longer be robbed of their real identities.

The story of this Zaynab has been associated in some minds with ridiculous fabrications regarding the moral integrity of Muhammad. These vicious fabrications are not even worth considering here
please also read the Quranic verses 32:36, 32:37, 32:38, 32:40
it was the command of God that he married Zainab, just to abolish certain corrupt traditions.
<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110320175743AAnHirF" target="_blank">http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...20175743AAnHirF</a>

Or if it does not satisfy you then here I have a better source Wikipedia:

In Pre Islamic Arabia adoption was common and Zayd was given to him as a slave by his wife Khadija. Muhammad freed him and took him to Kaaba in Mecca and declared Zayd his son (thus becoming one who received Muhammad's grace). With coming of Islam all relations of adoption were nulled. And Muhammad himself started calling Zayd Zayd ibn Harithah instead of Zayd bin Muhammad (Zayd was known as Zayd bin Muhammad i.e. son of Muhammad). Since Zayd's background was a slave, and Muhammad wanted to lift the social status of freed slaves (like Zayd) he asked for Zaynab's hand in marriage for Zayd. Zaynab was Muhammad's first cousin, daughter of his aunt Umaima bint Abdul Muttalib. Zaynab had initially refused to marry Zaid because of his slave background and the same displeasure had come from her brother, 'Abdullah bin Jahsh. However on insistence of Muhammad, Zaynab and everyone else agreed. The marriage was a failure as Zaynab found it extremely difficult to accept a freed slave as her husband. Zayd got tired of her and the bitterness had left him with no desire for her eventually leading to their divorce.Zaynab being Muhammad's first cousin was no stranger for him, he had seen her hundreds of time in his aunt Umaima bint Abdul Muttalib's house for over thirty years before she became Zayd's wife.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jul 8, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> There are no Scientific Errors in Quran(The Validity of Embryology):
> http://www.answering-christianity.com/nadeem_embryology.htm
> 
> All criticisms have been answered in the above link.
> ...



But you could answer how come you don't think it getting some things wrong doesn't make it imperfect. It's also wrong about the Torah being corrupted over time. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that. And Exodus is in there and that has being proven never to have happened as well.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 8, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> 6th century BCE.
> 
> Oops! Silly me....Sorry for this.I have edited my post.
> 
> ...



Prove what?The validity of Torah?or Ouran wrong?

The Dead Sea Scrolls have nothing against Islam:
http://www.islamicsearchcenter.com/archive...ls-prove-islam/


----------



## Magmorph (Jul 8, 2011)

You only question the validity of scientific theories when they contradict with the Quran. If a scientific theory seems to correspond with a specific interpretation of the Quran you are quick to accept it as valid.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jul 8, 2011)

I have steered clear of this debate for reasons unknown (I am usually in there early on for such things) but at the risk of ruining TrolleyDave's fun some things probably need to be mentioned

Islam as a historical influence- in short study it and study it well alongside any other major societal/political philosophy (and as many minor ones as you care to). For any to ignore it in their study of such things would be a fairly heinous act. Certainly historical conditions would have made things that we are now debating in this thread quite justifiable- spinning it for a moment to look at Judaism and kosher foods it is not such a stretch to see some of the concepts there being quite valuable when one is moving around deserts where today it is somewhat less relevant as a survival trait which brings me to the related concept.
"Islam as a political philosophy for the present day" (the implication being a direct application of the texts). I should first acknowledge Islam as having a major political component as opposed to many of the other religions of antiquity but here might fall flat.
So far so much nothing of note though so
The core concept uniting most philosophies seems to be something along the lines of
Human life/existence (including comfort of existence) is pretty sweet and save for the occasions were another infringes upon another's existence (punishment) then it should not be restricted- a key term in all this being equality. I need to add a phrase along the lines for meritocracy to be allowed (if someone does some righteous acts then they can be noted at various points/used for situations that might on the face of it go against equality) which is what gets us to the points I want to cover.
Situations that seem to be causing debate
Polygamy- historically as a means to allow for population maintenance, political manoeuvring and to maintain societal structure. Absolutely (well ignoring the population thing and some more modern research- some analysis of the birth rates of the polygamist Mormon sects was compiled by various people over the last few years and polygamy might not be quite as beneficial to birth rate as simple logic might point toward) but if we are doing the whole equal thing then purely by virtue of that polyandry must be equally viable.
Slavery- certainly many aspects appear to make slavery somewhat more difficult to conduct, continue and in some cases provides a code of conduct and certainly a straight abolishment of it tends not to make friends (see other points in history where it was abolished/restricted and the aggro that caused). However moving to the human existence thing the refusal to provide at least a timeline to abolish it
Issues of sexism- again historically it might have been somewhat more justifiable but again now unless it goes against physics then it is equal or nothing.

Secondly we can debate these and more all day long but I also want to cover the modern world- the complexities of IP law (something that did not really exist back then), finance (beyond a sort of justification for any resulting laws), some of the international laws and so forth.


Islam as a religion (I will spare us the debate as to the many sects for a moment) when attempting to be for want of a better word judged through the lens of the modern world causes some issues which we seem to be debating here. However the works of Islam being used to form a personal philosophy is in many ways a commendable thing (life is complex and to try to arrive at a philosophy from scratch possibly an insurmountable task) - setting out to form a personal philosophy and having it arrive as the result of intense study of such topics is about the best one can reasonably hope for. That you might be prepared to debate your philosophy is also a positive however if you should choose to modify things and/or pick and choose then you will have a hard time calling yourself a follower of Islam (although I will note that what indeed makes a religion is somewhat open to debate- see issues with forming a new one in various countries around the place).

Two things I see quite a bit of in this are reductio ad absurdum (without a lot of qualifiers it can lead to lines in the sand allowing for a lot of bizarre situations) and a serious measure of verbal gymnastics although this might well stem from assuming various sources are infallible (moving back to the earlier then vs now- the formation of Islam would have been late enough to see how various religions had been twisted so to call it infallible might well be a protection mechanism). I will note that translation and linguistics in general (languages evolve)


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jul 9, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> Prove what?The validity of Torah?or Ouran wrong?
> 
> The Dead Sea Scrolls have nothing against Islam:
> http://www.islamicsearchcenter.com/archive...ls-prove-islam/



I'm not arguing against validity of either in particular. I'm saying it has not being corrupted over time, and the dead sea scrolls prove that, not that they speak out against a faith that didn't exist when they where written. I don't care what characters from the books say about it, the only proof you have that those characters say those things or even existed are those books themselves. Circular logic does not prove anything.

EDIT: And I love your habit of ignoring points that don't have a pre-made answer on extremest websites.
EDIT the second: Oh dear, I meant extremest as in extreme literalist. I'm not saying your one of the other lot.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 9, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> I'm saying it has not being corrupted over time
> 
> Torah or the Bible both are corrupt.I don't care what you believe.And if you really want to debate over it than prove yourself because just mentioning the Dead Scrolls isn't going to help
> 
> QUOTEEDIT: And I love your habit of ignoring points that don't have a pre-made answer on extremest websites.



Which point did I ignore.......the Christian Worship one???
If you call these websites "Extremest" than according to your definition every site is extremest.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jul 9, 2011)

The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. You find me something in the Torah that has being corrupted without referring to the Koran. Find an older copy of the work and show the inconsistencies with the modern ones. The dead sea scrolls are the oldest known copies, start there and point out the differences.

And I corrected myself in the second edit. I don't get how God is better than us in every way but can not make analogies or metaphors. Can God not get his head around the concepts?


----------



## Magmorph (Jul 9, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You have been ignoring a great deal of points throughout the entire discussion. The vast majority of the points you do respond to are just copied and pasted from other websites.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 9, 2011)

cwstjdenobs said:
			
		

> The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. You find me something in the Torah that has being corrupted without referring to the Koran. Find an older copy of the work and show the inconsistencies with the modern ones. The dead sea scrolls are the oldest known copies, start there and point out the differences.
> 
> And I corrected myself in the second edit. I don't get how God is better than us in every way but can not make analogies or metaphors. Can God not get his head around the concepts?
> 
> ...



Dear,
First of all English is not my native language so writing it in great lengths is difficult for me and secondly I agree with your point that I very much post links to other websites this is because there are many things with which I am not familiar such as Embryology.So to escape any mistake from my side I try to search for it on the net,read it out and then post it accordingly.
Please do tell me which points did I ignore except for the Christian Worship one. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





And from now on wards I'll try to use links as less as possible and post my own original work.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Jul 17, 2011)

I had an incredibly busy week last week so didn't get alot of time to go online.  I'll answer everything later tonight.  Gonna have a lazy afternoon of catching up first!


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 17, 2011)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> I had an incredibly busy week last week so didn't get alot of time to go online.  I'll answer everything later tonight.  Gonna have a lazy afternoon of catching up first!




No problem! Take as much time you need


----------



## Jakob95 (Jul 17, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How is the Torah corrupt it has never been changed throughout history.  While the Bible has been changed many times...  And in my opinion the quran is corrupt.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 17, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> How is the Torah corrupt it has never been changed throughout history. While the Bible has been changed many times... And in my opinion the quran is corrupt.



It is your opinion.....think whatever you want to think.

And I didn't meant to say that the whole Torah is corrupt some of it may be right.
Let me use a more appropriate word "Unreliable"
For Example : If you are using a science book made in the 1980s today in your school that would be so unreliable......Just as the same take the Quran(the latest Book) and the Torah(outdated) into consideration.



Spoiler



The Qur'an teaches that Islam is the continued faithful religion in the same line as the Prophets who were before Muhammad: The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah ... and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus (42:13 AYA). 
The result of this view is that the scriptures given by these Prophets are considered to be genuine scriptures from God: 
But say, "We (Muslims) believe in the Revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you (Jews & Christians); our Allah and your Allah is One" (29:46 AYA).


----------



## DrOctapu (Jul 19, 2011)

Guys, I'd like to intervene by saying all of it's equally messed up.
Bible contradictions.
Quran contradictions.
I'd even post a list containing contradictions in the Origin of Species if there was one that listed it contradicting anything other than religious works. 
How is this thread still alive?


----------



## Jakob95 (Jul 19, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lol how can you even compare that to a 1980 science book. The Torah was written by god and he didn't make any mistAkes, while the person who wrote that science book could have written something that wasn't discovered during his time.  so lets say today I wrote my own holy book does that now make the quran outdated for you?


----------



## DrOctapu (Jul 19, 2011)

Jakob95 said:
			
		

> The Torah was written by god and he didn't make any mistAkes, while the person who wrote that science book could have written something that wasn't discovered during his time.
> I just want to emphasize this.
> 
> QUOTE(Jakob95 @ Jul 19 2011, 01:38 PM) so lets say today I wrote my own holy book does that now make the quran outdated for you?


Nope. The difference between religious texts and scientific texts (other than the obvious bits, like validity) in this case is that one of them is consistent (according to religion) and the other is constantly adapting and changing to fit what's observed lately. In any case, this argument's literally not going anywhere as you're both going to believe that you're correct no matter what anyone says


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 19, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> Quran contradictions.
> 
> There are no contradictions within the Quran actually there are contradictions in this website.........plain ignorance.
> 
> ...



Jakob your not getting my point........Yes, i agree He didn't made any mistakes but He also didn't deliver this Book as His final and Complete Word.
The time Torah was revealed people were different ,their livings,routines,earnings and beliefs all were totally different they could not understand or didn't have the ability to understand some things which are in the Quran that is why when people had evolved to the requirement Quran then was revealed.

Let me ask you a question....does the Torah say that it is the Book to mankind till Eternity.


----------



## DrOctapu (Jul 19, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How are they wrong, then?


----------



## Pyrmon (Jul 19, 2011)

chao1212 said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Do you want me to refute every one of the 32 claims? Because I will. Don't expect it today though.


----------



## Magmorph (Jul 19, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> And I didn't meant to say that the whole Torah is corrupt some of it may be right.
> Let me use a more appropriate word "Unreliable"
> For Example : If you are using a science book made in the 1980s today in your school that would be so unreliable......Just as the same take the Quran(the latest Book) and the Torah(outdated) into consideration.


The Book of Mormon is much newer than the Quran. Does that make the Quran outdated?


----------



## Jakob95 (Jul 19, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> bsfmtl123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Exactly who tells me that the quran is even real in the first place you might believe its real others don't.


----------



## _Chaz_ (Jul 19, 2011)

Anyone who thinks they can predict the future, let alone the end of the world, is a moron and should be banned from voicing their thoughts.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 20, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> The Book of Mormon is much newer than the Quran. Does that make the Quran outdated?
> 
> No! because Quran states that it is the Book to Mankind till Eternity and there will be no new Prophet or no new faith.
> And the Book of Mormon has no relevance to Quran......so try a bit to use your common sense rather then just making false statements.
> ...



Who thinks that the Torah and Bible are real........and who tells that the Quran is not real???   Atheists,Christians or Jews??


----------



## Magmorph (Jul 20, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Quran uses abrogation, which is an easy way of dismissing any contradictions.


----------



## bsfmtl123 (Jul 20, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> You are trying to argue that the Quran makes the Torah outdated because it is newer. The Book of Mormon does have relevance to the Torah and it is much newer than the Quran.



This is because Quran states that there won't be any further books from Allah.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jul 20, 2011)

bsfmtl123 said:
			
		

> And I didn't meant to say that the whole Torah is corrupt some of it may be right.
> Let me use a more appropriate word "Unreliable"
> For Example : If you are using a science book made in the 1980s today in your school that would be so unreliable......Just as the same take the Quran(the latest Book) and the Torah(outdated) into consideration.



So are you saying your definition of corrupted is "not exactly the same as a derivative work", and not "not as it was originally written"? And what difference does something being outdated make in this argument? By that logic I could easily argue that if the Bible got outdated in 600 years then the whole lot of those bronze age works are by now, in the modern era, outdated and irrelevant.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jul 21, 2011)

chao1212 said:
			
		

> Quran contradictions.





Spoiler



1: Word for verse is Ayah. Ayah means a revelation. Can be a verse or a whole scripture. The verse suggesting abrogation is talking about replacing old scriptures with new ones. I.E. the Torah with the Bible. 
2: I really don't see how one could understand that as “it's OK to drink alcohol”.
3: Referring to two different events. Marry was visited by angels long before she was to give birth to Jesus.
4: The people go astray. God doesn't make them. But God doesn't help those who, in full knowledge, reject Him. An if you read the verses carefully, you notice only one speaks of leading people astray and it is mistranslated. Correct translation is “allows to go astray”.
5: God is omnipotent. But he does not produce children. It's an absurdity. The “How can He?” really means "Why in the world would god have a son?".
6: The word "day" in Arabic also means "period". And if you read the full verse, it says it takes angels a period of 50,000 years to reach God. 
7: God made the "devils" as protecting friends, but disbelievers choose to take them as friends. And to disbelieve.
8: Saying the Pharaoh's body was preserved does not mean his soul or his life was saved. The verse actually refers to the Pharao's mummification.
9: Belief in God means belief in a single, true God. Not the trinity. Some Christians do not believe Jesus is God, thus some Christians won't go to hell. As for Jews, to my knowledge, don't put any prophet as the equal of God and, thus, have a good chance of being saved. They also share many values, principles, guidelines and history.
10: Muhammad does not ask money for himself. He asks the followers to spend money in the cause of God. Meaning Charity and such. Any money Muhammad received, he gave away. That is why he only possessed two coins when he died.
11: Muslims are only allowed to fight as a way to defend themselves. We can't hurt another soul, be it a Jew, Christian, Mormon, Buddhist or whatever, unless the other party committed acts of aggression towards us. 9:29 therefore refers to wartime.
12: All that is in the Earth as in what the Earth is made of. Matter. Also, the word translated as “then”, tumma, can also mean “moreover” and “also”.
13: God does not forgive people who die in a state of sin. He does, however, forgive anyone who repents for any sin. You know, before being dead, and knowing for certain God exists and knowing you fucked up.
14: These passages don't narrate the same time. One is before the battle, the other is after. We are led to conclude that 1000 angels were sent at first and that more joined them during the battle.
15: You are free to follow the law, but if you don't, there are consequences. And the last thee groups of verses are either taken out of context or mistranslated. Most refer to wartime, while in some the word translated as friend should be translated as ally.
16: The Earth was made in two days and it's provisions calculated in four. The calculations were made within a time period of four days during which the Earth was also created. Then the completion of the Heaven took another two days. I know it is hard to see in a translation, but the original Arabic is slightly clearer. Ahmed Raza Khan's translation makes it easier to see, but you need to read verse nine and ten together, not separately. I'm not sure I'm explaining it right.
17: In Arabic grammar there is a rule known as Tagleeb, according to which, if the majority is addressed, even the minority is included. If for example, I address a class containing 100 students of whom 99 are boys and one is a girl, and if I say in Arabic that the boys should stand up, it includes the girl as well. I need not mention her separately. If you apply that to the verses, it becomes clear. 
18: The people go astray. God doesn't make them. But God doesn't help those who, in full knowledge, reject Him. An if you read the verses carefully, you notice only one speaks of leading people astray and it is mistranslated. Correct translation is “allows to go astray”.
19: Oh boy...  This isn't a contradiction. It's in fact in complete accordance to science. We and all other known life-forms are made for a big part of water. The parts about dust, dirt, clay, mud and such are a reference to the fact we are made from earthly materials, such as metals. The drop of fluid and cloth refer to the conception of humans. The drop is sperm and the cloth is our appearance in the womb at an early stage. The nothing part has two possible answers. There is that God made matter, from which we are obviously made, out of nothing and that matter is mostly empty. If you grew an atom to be the size of a stadium, the nucleus would be a grain of sand in the middle and the electrons would be dust floating around it. These verses acknowledge that we aren't made from a single material, but from several.
20: God can forgive any sin if one seeks forgiveness. That is why He is merciful. But one who does not seek forgiveness won't get help. One can have mercy and be sever at the same time.
21: The only thing these verses say is that God is allowed to make distinction between the messengers but not the believers.
22: The verses do not say that Iblis doesn't mislead Muslims. The verses say that only few do not get effected by Iblis. The scholars say that among the few are prophets & messengers of God and people of high status of faith. 
23: Each prophet is the first from among his people. He is the one leading them to Islam. To be exact, Adam was the first Muslim.
24: The son who remained was a wicked person and, thus, wasn't considered a part of Noah's household. You see that when you read the following verses.
25: Everything is obedient to God to some extent. Even an unbeliever is obedient to God's law in some way. For example, God made food for us to eat. By eating it, you are following the natural law of God. Even if you don't believe in God, you will eat. Iblis may have been an unbeliever, he follows the natural law of God.
26: I f you take both set of verses together, this is the order in which the events happened. Moses leaves his people to go on the mountain. The people make a statue of a calf to worship while he is gone. Aaron warns them and they respond they will stay devoted to the calf until the return of Moses. Later, they realize how stupid they were. Then Moses returns. I always though it was pretty obvious.
27: The second set of verses are actually translated as “we do not send the angels except for a purpose” or “except with Truth”, Truth being a message or revelation, which also shows the same meaning.
28: If you read different (and arguably clearer) translations(and the whole verses), you see this first two verses talk about God taking away the light from the fire, leaving the person unable to see. And both verse refer to two different parables.
29: Ordering punishment for murder whoever the murderer and the murdered are is hardly promoting slavery.
30: The verse does not say God can't have a son. Re-read the whole verse.
31: I already talked about this one in my previous replies. Short story is that the two verses don't contradict, but rather complement.
32: The verses prior to 10:83 re-count the same event as in 7:120 but does not mention the ending of the narrative and instead jumps to the general response of the population to Moses' preaching in Egypt. The 120th verse of the 7th surah shows the ending of that particular story.


Damn, that was long to write on my iPhone.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jul 22, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> 10: Muhammad does not ask money for himself. He asks the followers to spend money in the cause of God. Meaning Charity and such. Any money Muhammad received, he gave away. That is why he only possessed two coins when he died.









He owned that big dark brown bit when he died. Hardly just two coins.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jul 22, 2011)

cwstjdenobs said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He was a political leader, but he did not "own" the land. And sorry, he had seven coins when he died.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jul 22, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> He was a political leader, but he did not "own" the land.



He was an emperor, no matter how you want to play with words, and that was his empire. He even passed the throne on to one of his family members, so not only an emperor but one who wanted to set up a dynasty too. Now that is in no way meant as an insult but saying he only had so many coins when he died because that's what he had on him at the time while ignoring the fact he ruled all of the Arabian peninsula at the time is daft.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jul 22, 2011)

cwstjdenobs said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sure, but is that point really relevant? He was still quite poor financially.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jul 23, 2011)

Pyrmon said:
			
		

> Sure, but is that point really relevant? He was still quite poor financially.



What I'm saying is that in that position that image of humble living could be nothing more than an illusion, a veneer so to speak, no matter how much he might have wanted it otherwise.


----------



## Pyrmon (Jul 23, 2011)

cwstjdenobs said:
			
		

> Pyrmon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not sure I understand. Could you re-phrase?


----------



## cwstjdenobs (Jul 23, 2011)

I'll try. How about this, with money you can buy power but with enough power you don't need money. Vast amounts of money would not give him any more power or allow him to do anything more than he already could. Not only was he the highest royalty in the land, but as far as his followers where concerned the word of God came directly from him as well. He didn't give up either of those sets of powers he had over the people. So his lack of liquid money was at best him trying to be seen as living a humble life as an example, a neutral stance could be he just didn't need to carry money, or at worst it was just a bit of PR.


----------

