Simple Test for the quran

[path]

Except the Koran isnt authentic if it is in any other language but Arabic

So god only speaks arabic or he thought that humanity only spoke arabic?

 

[surenderer]

So god only speaks arabic or he thought that humanity only spoke arabic?

Lol Path, sup.......thought we had this discussion allready To avoid the "translation" debate that the Bible has occured(sp?) The Koran is only authentic in the language in which it was revealed. Thats why muslims learn arabic. That doesnt mean that everyone should learn Arabic or anythin ,only that for those who dont know Arabic that there will be things that "you arent getting" I know this for a fact because i read parts of the Koran before i was muslim and way before i learned Arabic and now(knowing Arabic) i can see the difference.....peace

 

[path]

Lol Path, sup.......thought we had this discussion allready To avoid the "translation" debate that the Bible has occured(sp?) The Koran is only authentic in the language in which it was revealed.

Yes we touched on this surrenderer but still this is a serious limitation/copout as I stated earlier there were in fact other much more widely known languages available to god if he wanted to effectively "spread the word" Even better he could have given multiple translations of the quran to Mohammed or as I said earlier he could have revealed it in a new "universal language" that would have been a miracle in itself (honestly he IS god afterall).

Thats why muslims learn arabic. That doesnt mean that everyone should learn Arabic or anythin ,only that for those who dont know Arabic that there will be things that "you arent getting" I know this for a fact because i read parts of the Koran before i was muslim and way before i learned Arabic and now(knowing Arabic) i can see the difference.....peace

I believe the religion is based on arabic because it is an arabic religion early muslims weren't just spreading islam they were spreading arabic culture supplanting the cultures and languages in the places they conquered with their own. Everywhere that arabic has taken over the interest in things non-arabic has waned to a xenophobic degree. Check out this bit of info

Interestingly, the report found that the total number of books translated into Arabic yearly is no more than 330, or one-fifth of those translated in a small country like Greece.

Indeed, the total number of books translated into Arabic during the 1,000 years since the age of Caliph Al-Ma’moun [a ninth-century Arab ruler who was a patron of cultural interaction between Arab, Persian, and Greek scholars—WPR] to this day is less than those translated in Spain in one year.

That is shocking don't you think? From here

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Except the Koran isnt authentic if it is in any other language but Arabic

that's so only arab speakers know its 'truth', what does "A.L.M." mean? why would a so-called god of the universe, limit himself to arabic? if he was the god of the universe, he would want his 'book' to be translated into the languages of man (& 'alien'?) or is it the 'enforcer' of arab supremacy in religious matters?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Sorry for letting you wait, (got a lot on my mind.) I wasn’t really expecting to see a response to the point.

Civil society does the same thing, infidelity is legal grounds for divorce no earth shattering difference here.

Oh but there is an earth shattering difference. First civil society only “mentions” it. “Oh and by the way, if you get caught you risk divorce”. In Islam however it is a concept that you are brought up with. “Adultery is never allowed even if you are not married, even if there is no one around (Allah is always there)”. There is quite a difference here.

It is sad that we are so imperfect isn't it but there is also a beauty to it. I have had many intimate (not sexually) female friends in my life and have greatly benefited by having them. Learning to harness your emotions and desires is a lifelong process that requires much effort. Islam takes the easy way out through isolation. Islams paranoid controlling dogma would have made me a poorer human being.

There is beauty in many things to many different people. That doesn’t mean that everything that has some beauty in it should be allowed. For instance, the Qur’an says that wine and gamble have something good, yet since their evil is greater than they good they are not allowed. And what is the percentage of platonic relationships? and how many of them develop in something greater or at least cause friction in a marriage. (certainly in marriage, a (imo) normal women would not gladly accept that her husband should have an intimate relationship with another woman.)

Islam doesn’t take the easy way her. It doesn’t follow the whims of its followers by tolerating that is bad simply because some of them might see beauty in it. Islam is realistic. And let’s say it would have taken your “difficult” way, how many men would have had such exemplary behaviour as you have done and would that be worth it? to let a multitude go wrong so that one can have his challenge?

That sex sells doesn't go unnoticed in the west and there is constant debate and dialog regarding the ethics of it.

Certainly there is difference between paying lip service to it without any prospect of actually doing anything about it on the one hand, and concluding the judgment that it is wrong and them making sure it doesn’t happen on the other hand.

Here is where there is a great deal of disagreement between our world views. Islam says "men can't help it" "they brought this upon themselves" While the west says "you are your own master" you damn well better control it or get help to. Each models gains something but sacrifices something else.

No. Islam says you everyone is responsible of himself. Muslim men are not even supposed to look in an indecent way to a woman, even if she is naked before him. Islam, however, In Allah’s wisdom, teaches that things are not as simple as that. Men are, and there is no denying this, indeed attracted by women. And the way our societies are, where women are showing everything they got, you cannot deny that it is very difficult for a man to abstain from any unlawful relationship. Now one can be a very virtuous man and still let his guard down for a moment, especially if that moment is everyday life. Islam doesn[‘t ask from one more than one can give. So Islam has the overview over things.

Indecency is subjective, I have been on a nude beach and felt NO sexual tension while other times just being in a room with fully clothed people the tension was so thick you could cut it with a knife. If you tend to believe everything is immoral or dirty then it will seem so to you. In the words of Zarathustra

Did he speak English? Anyways the guy (I assume he is a guy) seems to be posing a tautology (as many wise guys do). That might be (not certain it is(!)). But in a set community you must have one. Otherwise you can’t implement it. And for a Muslim, what is better than the definition Allah gives?

Btw this further illustrates that not only clothes but the mindset of people should be taken into consideration. Again Islam has the overview.

Adultery is bad in all societies only in islam is adultery sanctioned (for the man only) in the ability to make other partners into additional wives.

Are you sure it is only in Islam? Also Islam does that for reasons.

For instance, Christianity, I had the impression, agrees with you that a second marriage is an adulterous matter. But it also forbids divorce. So the man cannot but do it illegally.
In “modern” societies the man is allowed to divorce and remarry. This means that the first woman is totally abandoned to her sake and she can have the privilege of being a single mother.
Islam however let’s the man do the, generally, inevitable but constrains him. This means he can remarry but he doesn’t abandon the first woman. And he must treat them equally (if he sleeps with this one he has to with second) in physical and economic sense and in treatment. Also suppose the woman is very old or ill or can’t have children, civil society proposes that he leaves her and remarry. Islam has a solution that meets all’s needs.

The cost of keeping the -potentially destructive- public domain in check is to restrict free human interaction forcibly(see zarathusas quote above)

I don’t see what Zarathusas’ statement has got to do with this. Anyways, again giving people the opportunity to do ill to themselves is not as cracked up to be as many think.

What do you get like frequent flier miles or a better seat in heaven or more virgins? what reward?

I don’t know. Maybe you get your reward in both lives. In this one though a better relationship with your mate, in the next the possibilities are countless.

As all marriages tend to do

lol. Let me explain that sentence, I am talking about Early marriage. Now all marriages give room for sex. Yet not all marriages are early, so they don’t all give that opportunity when it is most needed, in early adulthood. One is rather forced to seek that fulfillment elsewhere.

Forced by who? If a man is weak he can be lead astray the challenge with giving yourself to another for life is to work through it all adversity and joy. So when a man lets his EGO get the best of him and he tries to recapture his youth with a new younger wife (a vain attempt since it will not satisfy his longings for his lost youth on anything other than a superficial level) he gets the blessings of islam.

Forced by his instincts. That doesn’t mean it is good or bad, simply that it is. I already explained this a little higher up.

Can you please give a reference for those figures?

That was an anecdote given by a professor in my university. Guess I should not have taken his words for granted. The actual figure is 24% or 1 in 4.

Yes a beautiful story for an old horny man in the fits of mid-life crises (which we in the west see more as something to get over not reward) How beautiful is it for the wife who now fully realizes that she is insufficient, inadequate. I could not possibly convey to you how much this would hurt my wife even the thought of it makes me sad

First it doesn’t have to happen. Since you are such a great guy you will simply not use that right of yours, pretty simple.

Now I think it would devastate her more if you were to divorce her first, in order to marry the secretary or the maid.

Btw not every woman would be shattered by a second marriage. I believe that the first wife has the right to refuse. Also there are many additional perspectives that demonstrate that polygamy is indeed a good solution to many individual and structural problems in society.

Isn't sex a big part of ANY marriage? Again with the rewards

That is besides the point here, I am not saying it is not. And I am not going to compare Islam with religions that say it is only for begetting children but Islam not only acknowledges that but he encourages it in marriage.

Sounds abit like a childrens argument rather than a law created by a supreme being don't you think.

To you it may. And it is understandably since are accustomed to a society that since long doesn’t place faith in the word of one of its members. Point is that these people were ones whose word you could build upon and that was ample proof.

 

[surenderer]

that's so only arab speakers know its 'truth'

Well thats not true because there are over a billion muslims in the world and they all arent arabs

why would a so-called god of the universe, limit himself to arabic? if he was the god of the universe, he would want his 'book' to be translated into the languages of man (& 'alien'?) or is it the 'enforcer' of arab supremacy in religious matters?[/

Yea like the Bible huh Look at how many different Bibles there are saying different things......You see your problem is that you want God to make things easy for you instead of making the effort to learn about him. What language would you prefer? English? German? would translations be problem-free in any other language?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

No I asked a specific question not for a background on the islamic view of marriage and relationships

You asked for the "cure" for adultery. But instead of discussing the one I posted you vainly tried to confirm your prejudice view that stoning is the solution.

You did, that is why I quoted you to avoid confusion.

I did not. At Best it was part of the solution.

Your post answered more than I requested. As to word games I believe my posts are usually very short and to the point I am not masking any of my answers am I.

You requested to know what the "cure" was. You just didn't want to accept it was not stoning. Here you simply negated the far more important parts of the "cure" to be able to speak about stoning. That negation is what I spoke about.

No but stoning is the prescribed method if you are found guilty, and it does happen, don't dance around the issue Bruce it makes it look like you are playing word games. Have some courage, give the answer, and stand by it, giving whatever explaination you need to.

Believe me, I have no trouble accepting the ways of the Prophet -peace be upon him- and standing by them. Stoning is not the solution. It is part of it or built around it. As is with theft, cutting hands is not the solution but providing a descent living for all. Here Omar.ibn.ul.Khattab -may Allah reward him- abolished the cutting of hands when starvation had Medina in its grips. because he couldn't garantee their right of a descent living.

Don't let me start about courage here, k.

Again you are accusing me Bruce I thought we got passed this. To quote you from Sufi's deviated thread

You make seem like people are persecuting you. He that questions you is filled with hate??? and you have a monopoly on love?? You know and he that uses arguments to question you is ignorant

I am far from saying that you are persecuting me. I am saying that you are not being attemptive. Nor am I saying you are filled with hate, I, admittedly, generalized about your sources, but I don't say you are filled with hatred towards Islam. And as far as you do give arguments I respond with arguments. Not like someone we both know

I do read about islam Bruce and it is not all bad.

But is what you read from Muslims? I am not saying don't read from others than Muslims. I am saying that in order to know how Muslims think you should read what Muslims write. And since you have ample knowledge you don't have to fear from getting a too one-sided image, on the contrary, you would be balancing it.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Yes we touched on this surrenderer but still this is a serious limitation/copout as I stated earlier there were in fact other much more widely known languages available to god if he wanted to effectively "spread the word"

HAve you not read?? Allah knew that those languages would die soon.

Even better he could have given multiple translations of the quran to Mohammed or as I said earlier he could have revealed it in a new "universal language" that would have been a miracle in itself (honestly he IS god afterall).

Arabic did just fine.

I believe the religion is based on arabic because it is an arabic religion early muslims weren't just spreading islam they were spreading arabic culture supplanting the cultures and languages in the places they conquered with their own. Everywhere that arabic has taken over the interest in things non-arabic has waned to a xenophobic degree. Check out this bit of info

Is that info meant to show that everywhere Arabic set non-Arabic things waned into disinterest? Now first spain has different means than what was avalable before (you know, massmedia and the like). Second that pece of info show the decay the arab world suffered from (in other areas of life too, but also the crusades, the Mongols, colonialism and now dictatorship). Also, have you forgotten that you were the one that said that Muslims profitted from earlier knowledge? how can that be if they didn't have interest in foreign things.

btw, (you din't ask but) the report is not shocking, already we are beginning to see our dark ages dissipate as Islam is once again gaining foothold in our lives. There is hope for the (near)future.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

If God does not sow confusion, then why isn't it absolutely clear which religion is the true religion of the world?

It is. Men don't take it seriously and don't search for it and if they do they are not honest in their quest. They rather have this beautiful and tempting life, they rather have "freedom" (lol), they rather stick by what is familiar and the way their parents were etc etc...

The Bible is very complicated and there are many parts we still do not understand today, but God told us parts of the Bible would be sealed until He was ready for us to understand them, and indeed, He did just that. The Bible is full of prophecies. If we could all understand them perfectly before they happen, we would all be trying to make each one happen. Therefore, we usually do not understand them until after the prophecies pass.

Many (on this forum) would say it was paul that complicated everything (just look for any post of Medicine_Woman and you 'll learn enough about it, I really don't care for debating christianity)

About the prophecies (Do you mean the Torah?) wasn't Jesus-peace be upon him- supposed to be back by now.

This is not what your hadiths/history says.

Be concrete.

:m:

 

[Bruce Wayne]

This is, probably not meant as a challenge, but I view it as a forcefull indication. Never have I heard of a single christian that memorized the bible, which is understandable considering the lmany languages that claim to have the exact word, the many versions, translations, interpretations and so on.

Can't they memorize it in Aramic or something? We have the original in Arabic so we can. There is a difference.

And you don't think that the Quran has many versions since it's been translated? Every book that is translated has different words, which usually mean the very same thing, including the Quran.

A version is not a translation. A version indicates how many verses and chapters and books there are. The meaning of the Qur'an are translated. The bibles, in the same language has different versions. It is different.

Peace be upon you.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Can't they memorize it in Aramic or something?

what? we have millions that memorize verses, we have many that learned Hebrew, Aramaic & Koinonia Greek, but why should we, the printing press sent the Bible to the masses in languages that they understand & speak. also, we are a literate people, unlike all those people all over the world that memorize the quran but don't know arabic, what good is that? to repeat by rote what you don't know or understand? what a waste of brainpower, madrassa anyone?

We have the original in Arabic so we can. There is a difference.

not true, but a lie that is repeated constantly, so that in the Hitler model of propaganda, 'a lie told often enough becoms the truth'. you need to read your own hadiths about that, they already stae that there were at leadt 4 versions of the quran, plus many missing suras, oh, & calif Uthman got rid of the evidence, he burned it!!!

A version is not a translation. A version indicates how many verses and chapters and books there are.

are you sure? why are some qurans numbered diff for suras? wouldn't that be versions? any straight answer for that?

The meaning of the Qur'an are translated.

versions?, what do you call Ali, Pickthall?

oh yeah, muslims control all the rules of the debate, they make up the rules to their advantage. ho-ho-ho

The bibles, in the same language has different versions. It is different.

no, for you, call it the "meaning of the Bible" in English

Peace be upon you.

no, peace be upon you!

 

[path]

Oh but there is an earth shattering difference. First civil society only “mentions” it. “Oh and by the way, if you get caught you risk divorce”. In Islam however it is a concept that you are brought up with. “Adultery is never allowed even if you are not married, even if there is no one around (Allah is always there)”. There is quite a difference here.

Right, lets not forget what happens to the weak in islam.

There is beauty in many things to many different people. That doesn’t mean that everything that has some beauty in it should be allowed. For instance, the Qur’an says that wine and gamble have something good, yet since their evil is greater than they good they are not allowed.

See Islam just forcibly removes the choice and any possibility that the individual can act responsibly. Even Jesus said wine was permitted in moderation how did islam come to discard that concept?

And what is the percentage of platonic relationships? and how many of them develop in something greater or at least cause friction in a marriage. (certainly in marriage, a (imo) normal women would not gladly accept that her husband should have an intimate relationship with another woman.)

Many, and obviously you have no idea what you are talking about because it is hardly in your realm of experience.

Islam doesn’t take the easy way her. It doesn’t follow the whims of its followers by tolerating that is bad simply because some of them might see beauty in it.

No islam has no faith in the morality of it's followers (perhaps with good reason) and just throws out the baby with the bathwater.

Islam is realistic. And let’s say it would have taken your “difficult” way, how many men would have had such exemplary behaviour as you have done and would that be worth it? to let a multitude go wrong so that one can have his challenge?

You are speaking of much of the non-muslim world here you do the math. If you are refering to muslim men specifically then I would guess the numbers would be very low since they aren't culturally prepared to handle such situations. (there are some very ugly statistics here which we don't want to get into)

Certainly there is difference between paying lip service to it without any prospect of actually doing anything about it on the one hand, and concluding the judgment that it is wrong and them making sure it doesn’t happen on the other hand.

And there is also a difference between the ability to choose, and think critically and blind obedience.

No. Islam says you everyone is responsible of himself.

If this were true then there would be no need for such strict rules now would there.

Muslim men are not even supposed to look in an indecent way to a woman, even if she is naked before him.

Modesty is not an islamic concept.

Islam, however, In Allah’s wisdom, teaches that things are not as simple as that. Men are, and there is no denying this, indeed attracted by women. And the way our societies are, where women are showing everything they got, you cannot deny that it is very difficult for a man to abstain from any unlawful relationship. Now one can be a very virtuous man and still let his guard down for a moment, especially if that moment is everyday life. Islam doesn[‘t ask from one more than one can give. So Islam has the overview over things.

Of course it can be difficult to abstain procreation is humanitys job # 1 If you are talking about sexual relations between 2 consenting adults (single) then I see no problem, it is a natural thing, but it is up to the individuals.

Did he speak English?

Does that matter?

Anyways the guy (I assume he is a guy) seems to be posing a tautology (as many wise guys do). That might be (not certain it is(!)). But in a set community you must have one. Otherwise you can’t implement it. And for a Muslim, what is better than the definition Allah gives?

Btw this further illustrates that not only clothes but the mindset of people should be taken into consideration. Again Islam has the overview.

It seems that the overview islam has chosen is the "all things are swinish"

For instance, Christianity, I had the impression, agrees with you that a second marriage is an adulterous matter. But it also forbids divorce. So the man cannot but do it illegally.

Did you just completely forget about the option to not do it at all?! Oh I forgot it is a muslim MANs god given right. What about the women? they don't need it? they aren't interested?

KUWAIT: A Syrian expatriate is being interrogated by the public prosecutor after being caught while having sex with a woman in her house.

Reported A daily English news paper, The young man in his twenties, had gone to the house in the Renee area to install a water filter, but after he had completed the work the woman of the house offered him money to sleep with her.
He agreed and the door to the adjoining room, in which the woman's children and maid were present, was closed.

The man returned the next day and again had sex for money. The maid, who did not like what was going on, told the woman's husband, so he pretended to go to work and waited under the building.

Things went as planned and as soon as the Syrian rang the bell the maid called the husband who caught the Syrian and called the police.

The man confessed to both encounters, adding that he received KD 10 for the first time and KD 15 for the second. The woman and her lover have been charged with adultery.

from here

Poor gal if only she had similar rights to a man all this could have been avoided and sho could have saved herself 25 KD.

In “modern” societies the man is allowed to divorce and remarry. This means that the first woman is totally abandoned to her sake and she can have the privilege of being a single mother.

Have you heard of alimony Bruce? even in the worst of divorces the woman can't just be abandoned unless the man is destitute (in which case she may be better off)

Islam however let’s the man do the, generally, inevitable but constrains him.

yes yes I know weakness=rewards.

This means he can remarry but he doesn’t abandon the first woman. And he must treat them equally (if he sleeps with this one he has to with second) in physical and economic sense and in treatment. Also suppose the woman is very old or ill or can’t have children, civil society proposes that he leaves her and remarry. Islam has a solution that meets all’s needs.

Please find me 1 source where civil society proposes he leaves her.

Anyways, again giving people the opportunity to do ill to themselves is not as cracked up to be as many think.

Which is why we have laws and help organizations to combat it.

Forced by his instincts. That doesn’t mean it is good or bad, simply that it is. I already explained this a little higher up.

That is not being forced it is being weak.

First it doesn’t have to happen. Since you are such a great guy you will simply not use that right of yours, pretty simple.

Now I think it would devastate her more if you were to divorce her first, in order to marry the secretary or the maid.

She would be equally devastated either way the special relationship we had would be no more.

Btw not every woman would be shattered by a second marriage. I believe that the first wife has the right to refuse. Also there are many additional perspectives that demonstrate that polygamy is indeed a good solution to many individual and structural problems in society.

Bruce here is a little something for you to ponder. The woman has a lower status in islam ergo a girl is less desirable, you think I am just being biased I am sure but look here.

males per female in population

Look Saudi Arabia has 137 males per 100 females the mortality rate of females in many arab countries is too high to be explained away. Now in light of this your entire assumption that polygamy is a good thing for society falls flat on it's face unless you mean polygamy where the women have more than 1 husband. Even if the men in saudi arabia were monogomous there would still be 37 bachelors for every 100 married men.


Gotta go
stay chill

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Bruce here is a little something for you to ponder. The woman has a lower status in islam ergo a girl is less desirable, you think I am just being biased I am sure but look here.

males per female in population

Look Saudi Arabia has 137 males per 100 females the mortality rate of females in many arab countries is too high to be explained away. Now in light of this your entire assumption that polygamy is a good thing for society falls flat on it's face unless you mean polygamy where the women have more than 1 husband. Even if the men in saudi arabia were monogomous there would still be 37 bachelors for every 100 married men.

Gotta go
stay chill

that's 37 very lonely men, no wonder, that explains a lot of things, about why a lot of them let go, when they are 'free' in the West, who are these losers? & what are their options? 'gay' lifestyles, bride-buying? kidnapping? raiding the 3rd world poor? exporting them? excess males, means jihad anyone?

 

[path]

You asked for the "cure" for adultery. But instead of discussing the one I posted you vainly tried to confirm your prejudice view that stoning is the solution.

Bruce, to put this to rest once and for all here is exactly what I said.

What is this beautiful faiths prescribed method for dealing with adultery?

The word cure was yours.

I did not. At Best it was part of the solution.

Here is your quote

The best of cures!

Lets put this down to a misunderstanding we are really serving no point by arguing about it

You requested to know what the "cure" was. You just didn't want to accept it was not stoning. Here you simply negated the far more important parts of the "cure" to be able to speak about stoning. That negation is what I spoke about.

Refer to above I didn't request the cure I wanted to know the method to deal with an adulterer

Believe me, I have no trouble accepting the ways of the Prophet -peace be upon him- and standing by them. Stoning is not the solution. It is part of it or built around it. As is with theft, cutting hands is not the solution but providing a descent living for all. Here Omar.ibn.ul.Khattab -may Allah reward him- abolished the cutting of hands when starvation had Medina in its grips. because he couldn't garantee their right of a descent living.

Stoning is the final solution for dealing with the guilty adulterer. Great for Omar why do you praise someone who does nothing more than should be expected of a reasonable human being. Are the taliban going to hell because they continued to cut off hands despite the abject poverty and desperation of many afghanis under their rule?

I am far from saying that you are persecuting me. I am saying that you are not being attemptive. Nor am I saying you are filled with hate, I, admittedly, generalized about your sources, but I don't say you are filled with hatred towards Islam. And as far as you do give arguments I respond with arguments.

You seemed just as defensive as Sufi when you were discussing with him. I don't like islam I have no issue with muslims as long as they do not try and force their system on me and my loved ones (which extrapolates out to country).

But is what you read from Muslims?

As much as I can get as long as it is not too propagandized and that goes both ways.

I am not saying don't read from others than Muslims. I am saying that in order to know how Muslims think you should read what Muslims write. And since you have ample knowledge you don't have to fear from getting a too one-sided image, on the contrary, you would be balancing it.

Knowledge is power

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Right, lets not forget what happens to the weak in islam.

What are you talking about?

See Islam just forcibly removes the choice and any possibility that the individual can act responsibly. Even Jesus said wine was permitted in moderation how did islam come to discard that concept?

It takes away the responsibilty of irresponsible behaviour. Even most “civilized” countries take away the "right" to end ones life. About Jesus, I don't know whether he really did that.

Many, and obviously you have no idea what you are talking about because it is hardly in your realm of experience.

You don't know that. I have grown up as a romantic, I have actually had platonic relations (although sometimes the other person ended wanting more). I have really known Muslim (not Arab since that is the same as western) in the last few years. Till now most of my friends are non-Muslims, so I would say it is in my realm of experience.

No islam has no faith in the morality of it's followers (perhaps with good reason) and just throws out the baby with the bathwater.

No it doesn't. It does have faith in its followers, yet it takes everything into account. The ones that are indeed good do good, the others are also accounted for. Again it lays the responsibility on its followers, yet it doesn't abandon them there. It goes further to establish a virtuous city. It also gives ample room for the needs and instincts through lawfull means.

You are speaking of much of the non-muslim world here you do the math.

Who said it was much of the non-Muslim world? If you think that non-Muslims are better, than I can tell you, you don’t know the world that surrounds you.

If you are refering to muslim men specifically then I would guess the numbers would be very low since they aren't culturally prepared to handle such situations. (there are some very ugly statistics here which we don't want to get into)

There is a difference between Muslims and Arabs or people living in an "Islamic" country. You can hardly use the evidence of people that (if at all) pray 1 prayer in years. Just remember there is no real Islamic country around nowadays. For the record, Islam has been fought in nearly all those “Islamic” countries. Where that wasn’t the case it has been often abused by the ruling clans and classes.

And I am refering to the people I see in everyday life here Europe. From all social and intelectual classes and from all origins.

And there is also a difference between the ability to choose, and think critically and blind obedience.

So there is a difference between Islam and the rest, glad you confirm that.

And who says it is blind obedience, It is principled life, committed to higher virtues instead of infatuation with (temporal) pleasure.

If this were true then there would be no need for such strict rules now would there.

No there would. It places the responsibility on the individual yet it aids him. "if you want be obeyed ask for what is possible." Also laws are not bad simply because they are strict. Strict laws are that which held Sparta intact for centuries.

Modesty is not an islamic concept.

Yet I don't see anyone taking it seriously apart from Islam.

Of course it can be difficult to abstain procreation is humanitys job # 1 If you are talking about sexual relations between 2 consenting adults (single) then I see no problem, it is a natural thing, but it is up to the individuals.

Glad you added single, because I think it would have been painful for the wife...
You assume here that it is their right to go at it because they are the only one concerned with their actions and body. Now what if she gets pregnant? What do the latest statistics say about single moms? There are off course more repercussions than those for the baby that will be raised without a (known biological) father.

Does that matter?

You said it was in his words. Those were not his words as he spoke no English. Anyway, this as irrelevant as the statement of that man.

It seems that the overview islam has chosen is the "all things are swinish"

swinish?? If you mean that Islam said everything is unpure or filthy, than you are wrong. It sees good and bad in everything. Yet it makes deep judgments and doesn’t rest at the superficial. In wisdom, it doesn’t say men are bad or good. It says they have the potential to be better than angels or worse than devils. And so it sees the good and bad in all things.

Btw, It seems to you that Islam sees everything as swinish. What was the saying again?? “If you tend to believe that the overview Islam has chosen is the "all things are swinish" then it will seem so to you.” In my words.

Did you just completely forget about the option to not do it at all?! Oh I forgot it is a muslim MANs god given right. What about the women? they don't need it? they aren't interested?

No I have not. After all, Islam doesn’t force man to marry! The polygamy matter is quite a story of its own.

Poor gal if only she had similar rights to a man all this could have been avoided and sho could have saved herself 25 KD.

You and I don’t know the whole situation. Maybe (probably) her husband was not satisfying her and seeking his pleasure elsewhere. Although it would (not) be fun to see her children drawing lots to determine their fathers!

Have you heard of alimony Bruce? even in the worst of divorces the woman can't just be abandoned unless the man is destitute (in which case she may be better off)

Yeah I heard of it, wasn’t it renowned to be the few dollars that made everything better?? (btw Islam has it too, but it also has many other things on the side)

yes yes I know weakness=rewards.

no no, it doesn’t matter how many times you say it, it is neever gonna be true

Please find me 1 source where civil society proposes he leaves her.

Can’t you figure it out on your own? One has basically two choices. Divorce and remarry or don’t divorce and cheat.

Which is why we have laws and help organizations to combat it.

Beautiful! So you see how Islam establishes laws too. Only when those laws were applied, the help organizations were not really needed.

That is not being forced it is being weak.

Forced is the consequence of the weakness. Anyways it is life. Islam sets to change the men. But it is not blind to reality. As Machiavelli would say:” When the people go corrupt, strictness is necessary” Islam then continues to better the individual.

She would be equally devastated either way the special relationship we had would be no more.

Yeah, but the maid thing would be just a noch worse. Anyways, you are such a great guy this whole problematic will never confront you.

Bruce here is a little something for you to ponder. The woman has a lower status in islam ergo a girl is less desirable, you think I am just being biased I am sure but look here.

path, there is nothing wrong with being biased. You just shouldn’t let it stop you think, that’s all. The women has no lower status ( another subject in its own right). About little girls, In Mohammad’s time –peace be upon him- the Arabs used to burry theor newly born daughters as a daughter was less desirable. First of all, Allah Himself, denounces that. Second, the prophet -peace be upon him- once said (to remedy this) that whoever has raises three daughters in a good manner, he will die a martyr’s death. He was asked, “what if they were two” He said “also”. He was then asked “what if it was one girl only” he said “also”.

The arabs had the savage dealing of killing their daughters. In Islam that is murder, it is not tolerated and it is punished with the death sentence.

Look Saudi Arabia has 137 males per 100 females the mortality rate of females in many arab countries is too high to be explained away.

First it can be explained (if I look into it deeply enough). It could be the fact that the Saudi women have not been participating in the survey, or many other things, I could also doubt that survey since I have been doing research and I know how “scientific people go about researching”… etc. Maybe you could tell me how they came up with those numbers? What their methods were? But I don’t wanna go in that lane.

If you are alluding that the Saudi’s are killing their daughters or anything of the like, then, first, you should say it, and second that is not of Islam and is irrelevant in this discussion. Unless you want to follow up on something you might –wishfully- be thinking is the fault of Islam.

Now in light of this your entire assumption that polygamy is a good thing for society falls flat on it's face unless you mean polygamy where the women have more than 1 husband.

Wrong. It would mean that it is not the wisest to really practice it in that particular society. It would remain a wise everywhere else. Who knows, after a quarter century or more of wars that sex ratio will be skewed back again in Saudi-Arabia.

Even if the men in saudi arabia were monogomous there would still be 37 bachelors for every 100 married men.

The world is a big place. The last time “I” checked the number of human chromosomes is 46 over the whole world, isn’t it?

It is funny though, how you first tried to limit the conversation to stoning and then to polygamy. This shows that either you want to single out the things that you think speak ill of Islam or that you can only see those things. If it is the second then you are letting you bias take too great a role in your thinking.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

that's 37 very lonely men, no wonder, that explains a lot of things, about why a lot of them let go, when they are 'free' in the West, who are these losers? & what are their options? 'gay' lifestyles, bride-buying? kidnapping? raiding the 3rd world poor? exporting them? excess males, means jihad anyone?

Usa has a sex ratio of 0.97 male(s)/female (2003 est.). I guess this opens the possibility of very fruitfull relationships between the two countries.

(I know, I know I shuld not be feeding it, but I couldn't resist)

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Bruce, to put this to rest once and for all...

I appreciate the initiative.

Your words:

What is this beautiful faiths prescribed method for dealing with adultery?

method to deal with illness or disease = "cure"

and then:

Refer to above I didn't request the cure I wanted to know the method to deal with an adulterer

Now, here, I need you to concentrate. Note the shift from "adultery" to "adulterer". I rest my case.

Stoning is the final solution for dealing with the guilty adulterer.

Depends on the sircumstances, I guess. But why not?

Great for Omar why do you praise someone who does nothing more than should be expected of a reasonable human being.

"Reasonable" is overvalued here. You could say because he didn't do more than what is to be expected from a virtuous man that followed the guidance of Allah/God. You would be right, in one sense. But Omar -may Allah reward him- deserved praise from me for many an accomplishment. For me it suffices that he turned from a hard man into a loving and caring believer that was the pinacle of chivalry (an Arab concept as far as I know).

Are the taliban going to hell because they continued to cut off hands despite the abject poverty and desperation of many afghanis under their rule?

They have done other bad things and good deeds. Yet I leave their judgment to Allah/God.

You seemed just as defensive as Sufi when you were discussing with him.

Sufi is not defensive, he is dismissive. He knows he can't handle the arguments so he dismisses them. I, on the other hand, have handled all you arguments. I have had no problems with your allegations.

I do have to note here, that I have reacted to you in a different way than to others. Let me clarify, at first you have expressed in "ask me a question..." that you have nothing against Islam in particular. And now you say you don't like Islam. Not really contradictory, but it gives away your attitude. My impression of you, and this is not meant as an insult but is a remark from my part, is that you shy away from taking a stance (as in the example of the links earlier in this thread), you seem to be shifting your argument unwilling to commit to one single stance, a hypocrite. Now you may not be operating in that way, but it is merely my impression.

I don't like islam I have no issue with muslims as long as they do not try and force their system on me and my loved ones (which extrapolates out to country).

I respect that. Clarity is a great good and willing to protect your loved ones is a trait of real man. But I see you seek out Islam in particular and I wonder, what do you mean by "force"? What if a loved one becomes a Muslim? how would you treat him? Would you see his or her religiousness as a threat (to him or her)?

knowledge is power

Never defend such an open ended statement. When extrapolated they always fail.

I hope you receive this with a good heart; May peace be upon you.

 

[Knife]

hi, let me think about your staement a bit, gotta go eat & go to Barnes & Noble. see ya later

still waiting....

 

[Knife]

Hello Knife good to see you again you haven't been here in awhile hope the wife and kids are well.

The gift of choice has quite a bit to do with the point I was trying to make above.

wife and kids are fine, thanks for asking. well, i use the web sparingly or they would'nt stay my wife and kids for long

i check back every few days. i also like to take my time responding. like everyone, i sometimes get really frustrated with the naivety of some people and lack of open mindedness, so i take time to cool off. no need to anger people, the world has enough of them.

but i am usually around. its people like you that make it aaaaalll woooorth it! (you would note the drama if we were face to face)

 

[Tiassa]

Path:
re: Arabic and the Quran

Sometimes people say, with some frustration or anger, "Read a book, damn it!" In this case, I can't say I'm particularly upset about anything, so if I say, "Read a book," the only reason I do so is because part of your answer is there at the outset:

During the month of Ramadan in 610 CE, an Arab businessman had an experience that change dthe history of the world. Every year at this time, Muhammad ibn Abdallah used to retire to a cave on the summit of Mount Hira, just outside Mecca in the Arabian Hijaz, where he prayed, fasted, and gave alms to the poor. He had long been worried by what he perceived to be a crisis in Arab society. In recent decades his tribe, the Quraysh, had become rich by trading in the surrounding countries. Mecca had become a thriving mercantile city, but in the aggressive stamped for wealth some of the old tribal values had been lost. Instead of looking after the weaker members of the tribe, as the nomadic code prescribed, the Quraysh were now intent on making money at the expense of some of the tribe's poorer family groupings, or clans. There was also spiritual restlessness in Mecca and throughout the peninsula. Arabs knew that Judaism and Christianity, which were practised in the Byzantine and Persian empires, were more sophisticated than their own pagan traditions. Some had come to believe that the High God of their pantheon, al-Lah (whose name simply meant "the God"), was the deity worshipped by the Jews and Christians, but he had sent the Arabs no prophet and no scripture in their own language. Indeed, the Jews and Christians whom they met often taunted the Arabs for being left out of the divine plan. Throughout Arabia one tribe fought another, in a murderous cycle of vendetta and counter-vendetta. It seemed to many of the more thoughtful people in Arabia that the arabs were a lost people, exiled forever from the civilized world and ignored by God himself . . . .

(Armstrong, 3)

Honestly, I don't have much to add to that.
____________________

• Armstrong, Karen. Islam, A Short History. New York: Modern Library Chronicles, 2000.