Would you have followed the Prophet Mohammad?

[Saqs]

A question that often haunts me - for I most likely know the answer.

Think about this for a minute.

You are busy living your life, day to day, doing your business, following what your forefathers have taught you in religion.

You have your own group of friends, your politicking, and your own forms of sport.

Suddenly, a man amongst you declares that he is a Prophet of God and is here to warn you and change your ways.

What do you do?

Would any of us have been strong enough to leave our families, our ways of life, our daily comforts?

Would we brave and wise enough to step back and think about what he is saying? Or would we have called him a mad-man along with the majority of the people.

Would we have recognised that he has always been truthful before this, or would we have blamed him for witchcraft and magic?

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Interesting question. I would like to think that I would.

[Robert]

Suddenly, a man amongst you declares that he is a Prophet of God and is here to warn you and change your ways.

What do you do?


If I was a Bronze Age tribesman, I would probably listen to him. He must have been an extremely persuasive individual.

If he turned up in 2012, I wouldn't believe him.

[NJamal]

Looking at the traits of a person before he claim such things I would most probably have listened and believed in him. He was never found to be telling lies and involved with other such activities thats why any sane person would be attracted to at least listen to what he offers.

[bmwduran]

A question that often haunts me - for I most likely know the answer.

Think about this for a minute.

You are busy living your life, day to day, doing your business, following what your forefathers have taught you in religion.

You have your own group of friends, your politicking, and your own forms of sport.

Suddenly, a man amongst you declares that he is a Prophet of God and is here to warn you and change your ways.

What do you do?

Would any of us have been strong enough to leave our families, our ways of life, our daily comforts?

Would we brave and wise enough to step back and think about what he is saying? Or would we have called him a mad-man along with the majority of the people.

Would we have recognised that he has always been truthful before this, or would we have blamed him for witchcraft and magic?

Glad, I did not have to make that choice at that time, as i was not born, but, if i was and i did not then i would have been doomed for eternity,

[bmwduran]

people with arrogance mostly rejected the Prophets, Pharaoh knew what he was dealing with, but, his arrogance would not let him admit it,

[Badsha]

The thing is he calimed prophecy when he (pbuh) was 40


until he was 40 he was known to be a dead honest man with very high moral values. So people first got to know him and it wasn't that "random".

[HappyH]

Probably yes because am a very open minded person , and no one questioned his personality anyway he was a great human being

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

[Down2Earth]

as painful as it is for me to admit, but I doubt I would have.

[Zaz]

Doubt i wouldve and i can say the majority wouldnt have, its like some1 coming now and doing the same as the prophet did back 1400 years ago

Like the op said its not simple to question everything u believed in and follow a path that takes you away from your family, the comforts of your home to a path where you are vilified, crucified and mistrusted

[Tiger T]

I think the reason why a lot of people would say no now is because we already follow this great man's religion. So, in this context, if another man were to come to us and persuade us to follow his religion, we would simply say no.

At that time however, idol worship was common. And I don't mean no disrespect to any one when I say this, but i'm assuming that people were not entirely content with their religion. And when this great man revealed to them the message of Islam, it seemed the clear choice as he was such a great man himself. Along with that, it was the logical thing to do.

So to answer your question, and I know its easy for me to say this now, but I do sincerely believe that if 1400 years ago, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) came up to me as revealed the message of Islam, because of my existing beliefs, I would follow what he has to say and change my ways.

[pak4life]

Agree with bmwduran most of the people believed what the prophet (pbuh was saying was the truth it was their pride and arrogance which stopped them from accepting Islam. Maybe not staight away but after some time I would have accepted.

[Gabbar Singh]

Reminds me of this:

http://www.lolwtfcomics.com/upload/uploads/1329831524.jpg

[James]

At that time society was illiterate, superstitious and ignorant of many scientific realities. The individual also didn't exist as an abstract concept, so people were spineless sheep incapable of independent thinking. Easy to see, then, how and why Abrahamic mumbo-jumbo managed to become part of human civilisation back in the day. Nowadays a so-called prophet or Lamb of God is denounced as mentally ill and superfluous to requirements, rightly so too.

[MR__KHAN__JI]

At that time society was illiterate, superstitious and ignorant of many scientific realities. The individual also didn't exist as an abstract concept, so people were spineless sheep incapable of independent thinking. Easy to see, then, how and why Abrahamic mumbo-jumbo managed to become part of human civilisation back in the day. Nowadays a so-called prophet or Lamb of God is denounced as mentally ill and superfluous to requirements, rightly so too.

I would argue this point about religion in general... But I would argue Islam is different.

The total opposite in fact.

[James]

Why is Islam different?

NB 'Because it is the Truth', or variants of this comment, will not work as an objective answer to the question.

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Why is Islam different?

NB 'Because it is the Truth', or variants of this comment, will not work as an objective answer to the question.

Not cos it's the truth... They all claim to be that...

Having considered it analytically I have come to the objective conclusion that a man could not have written the Quran.

Secondly it encapsulates the essence of morality.

Put simply I cant argue against any of it objectively... I.e a more objective alternative to what it represents.

Further it represents a set of principles that actually stand the test of time.

Have you read it?

[James]

Yes I have read it. The Qur'an is part of my current written thesis on censorship in literature.

How can a man not have written it? I can see no logical pathway that would persuade you to say that about any book.

If the 'essence of morality' is giving your wife a light beating when you think she has misbehaved, punishing people who dare to have sex outside marriage, stoning homosexuals to death, and executing people who dare to question a belief system enough to leave it - well, you can have that morality for yourself. I will shape my own humanist morality by reading more widely.

[aashiqmizaaj]

Where can we leave complaints?

[azhar329]

At that time society was illiterate, superstitious and ignorant of many scientific realities. The individual also didn't exist as an abstract concept, so people were spineless sheep incapable of independent thinking. Easy to see, then, how and why Abrahamic mumbo-jumbo managed to become part of human civilisation back in the day. Nowadays a so-called prophet or Lamb of God is denounced as mentally ill and superfluous to requirements, rightly so too.

Offensive.

[James]

That depends whether you see stories of parting the sea, turning water into wine and human beings living until the age of 800-odd as realistic or not.

[azhar329]

That depends whether you see stories of parting the sea, turning water into wine and human beings living until the age of 800-odd as realistic or not.

Youre a funny guy; you can insult billions of people (not just muslims) by referring to their beliefs as mumbo jumbo and see no prob with it; yet you had an ache about me not saying RIP to the US soldier! lol

[James]

Why is it an 'insult' when we criticise a religion but acceptable to criticise anything else?

There are plenty of people who believe in the other things that they believe as strongly as you believe in Islam. Is it an 'insult' to criticise their beliefs too?

What makes a religion a protected belief system or ideology?

These are not rhetorical questions. They demand logical answers.

[Gabbar Singh]

Where can we leave complaints?

Why not argue against or challenge the posts you disagree with instead?

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Yes I have read it. The Qur'an is part of my current written thesis on censorship in literature.

How can a man not have written it? I can see no logical pathway that would persuade you to say that about any book.

If the 'essence of morality' is giving your wife a light beating when you think she has misbehaved, punishing people who dare to have sex outside marriage, stoning homosexuals to death, and executing people who dare to question a belief system enough to leave it - well, you can have that morality for yourself. I will shape my own humanist morality by reading more widely.

Obviously everyone is free to select their own moral view point, and anyone that suggests otherwise needs to think again.


Re the topic at hand.

I think you are looking at this the wrong way. You are taking your moral standpoint and then judging everything according to that.

I think you need to take a step back out of your comfort zone to look at it more objectively and rationally than perhaps you are.

Lets address a couple of points.

1) Re "written by a man".

If all you can come up with from a text as long as wide ranging as the Quran in terms of morality is the handful of items on your list, that should be enough for you to have a slightly different conclusion than "why on Earth couldnt it have been written by a man?".

The morality level - (leave aside the actual morals) - were well ahead of the morality level in the world 1400 years ago - would you concede that to start with?

2) Re the specific points you mentioned, we would need to deal with each of the items you deal with in turn and I suspect that a separate thread would be needed for each.

But either way, I feel a more general discussion without going into the detail of specific matters would be a better place to start. let me know if you disagree.


To all those criticising Whippy - lay off him - he asks valid questions and each and everyone of us should ask ourselves the same questions and seek out the answers.

[MR__KHAN__JI]

@Whippy.

I am always interested to know what a laymans viewpoint of the Quran is after they have read it, and I would be really interested to hear your views.

Warts and all.

[Zaz]

Asking valid questions is fair enough but calling other peoples beliefs mumbo jumbo is not on. Yes james may not agree with it -no ones forcing him to but at least show some respect

[soton]

Yes I would if a prophet came with revelation like Quran and offered solutions to modern day problems like Poverty Imperialism and Atheism

Plus he should have all these qualities


George Bernard Shaw:
"If a man like Muhammad (pbuh) were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed
in solving its problems that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness."


Professor Jules Masserman:
"People like Pasteur and Salk are leaders in the first sense. People like Gandhi and Confucius, on
one hand, and Alexander, Caesar and Hitler on the other, are leaders in the second and perhaps the third sense. Jesus and Buddha belong in the third category alone. Perhaps the greatest leader of all times was Mohammed (pbuh), who combined all three functions. To a lesser degree, Moses did the same."


Rev. R. Bosworth-Smith:
"Head of the State as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was Pope without the Pope's pretensions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a police force, without a fixed revenue. If ever a man had the right to say that he ruled by a right divine, it was Muhammad (pbuh), for he had all the powers without their supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life."

Diwan Chand Sharma, The Prophets of the East,
Calcutta 1935, page 122:
"Muhammad (pbuh) was the soul of kindness, and his influence was felt and never forgotten by those
around him."


John William Draper, M.D., L.L.D., A History of the
Intellectual Development of Europe, London 1875,
Vol. 1, pp. 329-330:
"Four years after the death of Justinian, A.D. 569, was born at Mecca, in Arabia the man who, of all
men exercised the greatest influence upon the human race . . . Mohammed(pbuh) . . ."

[James]

Thanks Khan, I appreciate the support, but the arbitrary negative remarks of others don't affect me. I can only continue to argue my stance. People who are prepared to argue their opinions in detail are by nature challenging, so will always be attacked. Me? I love a debate and welcome being challenged.

Khan you said yourself, in a below thread, that the revelations as described to the Prophet could have been mixed up as they were recorded by others. Even then it is impossible to purge the consciousness of Mohammed or another person, thus we can only believe it was the word of God that Mohammed presented anyway. The life of the Prophet has been inconsistently historicised and his Truth is down to belief.

I must say that I respect Mohammed as an individual. He was clearly very persuasive due to leading a generally good, moral, sociable life and he had an aura in front of groups of people.

But what, in all this, proves to us that there no way the Qur'an could have been written by a man or a woman?

[James]

Asking valid questions is fair enough but calling other peoples beliefs mumbo jumbo is not on. Yes james may not agree with it -no ones forcing him to but at least show some respect

Like I said -

'That depends whether you see stories of parting the sea, turning water into wine and human beings living until the age of 800-odd as realistic or not.'

Mumbo jumbo, or mumbo-jumbo, is an English phrase or expression that denotes a confusing or meaningless subject. It is often used as humorous expression of criticism of middle-management and civil service non-speak, and of belief in something considered non-existent by the speaker (such as ghosts or other superstitious beliefs), or the rituals of a religion the speaker does not believe in performed in a language that the speaker does not understand.

I am more than entitled to use this phrase about aspects of a religion, or any other belief system or ideology, that I find unbelievable. There is absolutely no reason for a religion to be uniquely protected from criticism. It is a belief system. That is all it is.

[James]

@Whippy.

I am always interested to know what a laymans viewpoint of the Quran is after they have read it, and I would be really interested to hear your views.

Warts and all.

Thanks, and definitely. The Qur'an is a good read and I find parts of it inspirational. Suras 91 and 99 are personal favourites. Then again I find parts of many other books inspirational, including the Bible.

However, I choose not to follow the Bible or the Qur'an to every word because I find parts of them alien, morally abhorrent, or unbelievable according to reality as we know it.

There is of course a lot to go over here. I would be more than happy to have an email conversation or even a cup of coffee with you and discuss the Qur'an.

:)

[Robert]

Asking valid questions is fair enough but calling other peoples beliefs mumbo jumbo is not on.

What is not on about it?

People can challenge my beliefs as much as they like and I won't get upset.

People who do get upset when their beliefs are scared of what could happen if their belief-structure collapses.

But what, in all this, proves to us that there no way the Qur'an could have been written by a man or a woman?

Nothing.

The walls of their belief system would come tumbling down if it were proven that a man wrote it, so they will defend those beliefs, rather than just build another wall of beliefs a bit further out.

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Thanks Khan, I appreciate the support, but the arbitrary negative remarks of others don't affect me. I can only continue to argue my stance. People who are prepared to argue their opinions in detail are by nature challenging, so will always be attacked. Me? I love a debate and welcome being challenged.

Khan you said yourself, in a below thread, that the revelations as described to the Prophet could have been mixed up as they were recorded by others. Even then it is impossible to purge the consciousness of Mohammed or another person, thus we can only believe it was the word of God that Mohammed presented anyway. The life of the Prophet has been inconsistently historicised and his Truth is down to belief.

I must say that I respect Mohammed as an individual. He was clearly very persuasive due to leading a generally good, moral, sociable life and he had an aura in front of groups of people.

But what, in all this, proves to us that there no way the Qur'an could have been written by a man or a woman?

Points noted.

Personally, I would focus less on Muhammad and more on the Quran itself.

I clearly distinguish between the Quran (which testifies in itself that it is the direct word of God) and other texts which are not so direct.

If I was to believe that the Quran was not the direct unadulterated word of God - I would refuse to believe its claims.



Maybe I wasnt clear in my previous post, and perhaps we can look at it another way.


Lets

1) Assume there is a God.
2) Assume that the Quran was the direct word of God.

What within it would cause you to question whether it was directly from God?

Other than the item you listed above?

[James]

People who do get upset when their beliefs are scared of what could happen if their belief-structure collapses.

This. All over.

People can say I am talking mumbo-jumbo if they like. I won't mind - I will just tell them why we disagree. But this also means I can criticise the beliefs of another without raising complaints or offending billions of people.

I say again - a religion is a belief structure. There are many religious and non-religious belief structures. There is absolutely no reason for any of them to be immune to criticism, and there is no reason why criticising one particular belief system becomes an insult.

[James]

Lets

1) Assume there is a God.
2) Assume that the Quran was the direct word of God.

What within it would cause you to question whether it was directly from God?

Other than the item you listed above?

Nothing, other than the item I listed above. Then again humankind is a huge item :D

[smoothcriminal]

I think the phrase "mumbo jumbo" is what is what is making people label those terms as offensive. I wouldn't get offended but I can see other "reasonable" people get offended. A better phrase than mumbo-jumbo perhaps can be used? "not in accordance with my beliefs" I would think would fit more into their boundaries of verbal prudence.

That's just my two cents. I love my religion and at the same time am not offended if others critique my religion through constructive criticism.

[KingKhanWC]

What is not on about it?

People can challenge my beliefs as much as they like and I won't get upset.

What belief? You have none. You believe life is here because of chance.

People who do get upset when their beliefs are scared of what could happen if their belief-structure collapses.

You're talking nonsense now. There is a difference between belief and faith.



Nothing.

The walls of their belief system would come tumbling down if it were proven that a man wrote it, so they will defend those beliefs, rather than just build another wall of beliefs a bit further out.

Why don't you Robert, James or Whippy go and prove it then?

The thread doesn't even apply to you two. Try reading the OP again and you should notice the question is for those who already accept the Prophet(pbuh) as messanger of God. You two don't so I suggest you don't derail it with your cheap digs and potshots and start a new thread to argue Islam is false. I'm pretty confident you're weak attempts will be easily refuted.

The mumbo jumbo is only coming out of two posters on this thread.

Show some real courage and start a thread giving your reasons why Islam is false.

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Thanks, and definitely. The Qur'an is a good read and I find parts of it inspirational. Suras 91 and 99 are personal favourites. Then again I find parts of many other books inspirational, including the Bible.

However, I choose not to follow the Bible or the Qur'an to every word because I find parts of them alien, morally abhorrent, or unbelievable according to reality as we know it.

There is of course a lot to go over here. I would be more than happy to have an email conversation or even a cup of coffee with you and discuss the Qur'an.

:)


Obviously I am impressed by the whole of the Quran :)

But those Surah's in particular I find encapsulates all that the Quran is about. It challenges you to get to the core of your morality. Right from wrong.

I would like to hear (see earlier post) the areas you find hardest to comprehend... and would be happy to take offline if needed.

I genuinely think that others could benefit from hearing what you find most challenging.

[James]

I think the phrase "mumbo jumbo" is what is what is making people label those terms as offensive. I wouldn't get offended but I can see other "reasonable" people get offended. A better phrase than mumbo-jumbo perhaps can be used? "not in accordance with my beliefs" I would think would fit more into their boundaries of verbal prudence.

That's just my two cents. I love my religion and at the same time am not offended if others critique my religion through constructive criticism.

Okay then. Let's say I accept this. Presuming I had said the latter, would the reaction have been much different? Probably not - what Robert has said about belief systems and the fear surrounding them is spot on.

[James]

I'm pretty confident you're weak attempts will be easily refuted.

Well so far our non-weak points, er, haven't been refuted at all. Let alone easily.

[smoothcriminal]

^ I dont know how "these" specific people would react, but I can PERSONALLY believe other people not liking the phrase "mumbo jumbo" could be open to have an intellectual conversation on religious scrutiny.

[James]

Obviously I am impressed by the whole of the Quran :)

But those Surah's in particular I find encapsulates all that the Quran is about. It challenges you to get to the core of your morality. Right from wrong.

I would like to hear (see earlier post) the areas you find hardest to comprehend... and would be happy to take offline if needed.

I genuinely think that others could benefit from hearing what you find most challenging.

Thanks, I'll think about what I do next with regards to this topic.

Bolded part - I genuinely think so too. But crucially, I don't think that they agree with us. Which is their right.

[KingKhanWC]

A question that often haunts me - for I most likely know the answer.

Think about this for a minute.

You are busy living your life, day to day, doing your business, following what your forefathers have taught you in religion.

You have your own group of friends, your politicking, and your own forms of sport.

Suddenly, a man amongst you declares that he is a Prophet of God and is here to warn you and change your ways.

What do you do?

Would any of us have been strong enough to leave our families, our ways of life, our daily comforts?

Would we brave and wise enough to step back and think about what he is saying? Or would we have called him a mad-man along with the majority of the people.

Would we have recognised that he has always been truthful before this, or would we have blamed him for witchcraft and magic?

I think it's difficult to say. For some it would be a lot harder but for others it may even be easier depending at what stage they heard the Prophet(pbuh's) message. If it was in Mecca then people would have to literally risk their lives accepting it. If it was later on in Medina where the people were living fairly well it would have been a lot easier.

Looking back at the Prophet(pbuh) life he was a man who was searching for answers. He was unhappy about living in a society were wrongs were done every day. Others at that time were also looking for the same answers so when the message came it was a blessing for them.

I hope I would have followed the messenger of God.

[James]

^ I dont know how "these" specific people would react, but I can PERSONALLY believe other people not liking the phrase "mumbo jumbo" could be open to have an intellectual conversation on religious scrutiny.

Then they can get over one term, study the many many other things I have posted, and have the intellectual conversation.

[KingKhanWC]

Well so far our non-weak points, er, haven't been refuted at all. Let alone easily.

Perhaps because you have diverted the thread and it's not the topic? As I said show some courage, start a thread and detail your points why you think Islam is false. Get help from uncle Robert too. Two heads are better than one.

This is an interesting topic, don't derail it.

[aashiqmizaaj]

Why not argue against or challenge the posts you disagree with instead?

Why not just point me where I can make my complaint?

[azhar329]

Okay then. Let's say I accept this. Presuming I had said the latter, would the reaction have been much different? Probably not - what Robert has said about belief systems and the fear surrounding them is spot on.

I highlighted the words "mumbo jumbo" in my initial post which I do find offensive. If someone has genuine questions about Islam then go ahead but phrases such the above are not on imo. I have never prevented anyone from asking a genuine question in any way and challenge anyone to highlight the post where I did.

[James]

KKWC - it is an interesting topic and the doubt on display has been the most interesting part of it. I will now let things unfold in reference back to the OP.

I/we may prepare the thread you have requested in future, but it will take a lot of time. Courage isn't the problem for me as I'm sure you appreciate. I simply have a thesis to write this month; I might have a go at starting the bigger debate in May. Until next time dude.

[James]

Why not just point me where I can make my complaint?

We have the Match Referee's Room forum for complaints regarding posts, threads, posters, moderation and policy, and will be very happy to have a discussion there. You can also report posts so they appear in the MRR with the red triangle in the top right-hand corner of every post.

[KingKhanWC]

Whenever you're ready James. :)

The doubts for people imo aren't because they doubt Islam as being the truth but doubting themselves to accept it at a time were things were far more difficult for early Muslims.

For around 13 years after God confirmed to the Prophet(pbuh) he was the messenger of God the Muslims in Mecca had to hide, subjected to torture, killed, forced into exile etc. Other's in Mecca who may have believed in the message failed to accept it for the risk of persecution.

At the same time one cannot underestimate the power of the messenger of God reciting God's words. Many people accepted Islam by simply listening to the message as language was important and not language came close to the Arabic of the Quran.

[Saqs]

Perhaps because you have diverted the thread and it's not the topic? As I said show some courage, start a thread and detail your points why you think Islam is false. Get help from uncle Robert too. Two heads are better than one.

This is an interesting topic, don't derail it.

Was about to post this.

Way to derail the thread and make it another Athiest vs Believer argument.

[Saqs]

If I was a Bronze Age tribesman, I would probably listen to him. He must have been an extremely persuasive individual.

If he turned up in 2012, I wouldn't believe him.

If not now then what makes you so sure that you wouldn't be so adamant about your views back in the days?

For those who answered that they would have followed him - hypothetically - if he hadn't existed yet and was sent down in 2012 - would you follow him now? Hypothetically?

Some other quite interesting points made here.

A recurring point being his character. I guess that was the master stroke of being given Prophethood after 40 years - that the logical mind woud have gravitated towards what he says - or at the very least entertained what he was saying if not for anything but his unblemished past record within society.

Tiger T also raises an interesting point - that the historical point in which he was given prophethood - there was spiritual unrest in the World. It had been almost 500 or so years since the World last knew of a Prophet of God. So there was a spiritual gap that needed to be filled and so perhaps people would have inclined?

But then you think about it like KingKhan says - for each person it was a difficult choice. It must have been. For the successful businessmen this was a threat to their way of life and economic prosperity.

For the slave this was a chance for freedom yes, but at the expense of being beaten or killed.

[Saqs]

Another interesting thing to consider is that the Prophet shook the establishment - to it's core.

It was a radical change from the status quo.

A lot of his ideas at the time were far ahead of his time. Women's rights, idol worship, burial of baby girls, tribal systems, the meaning of family and brotherhood, the rights of orphans, even animal rights.

So you must have have had to have an open mind to be able to follow a man with such a drastic vision of the world when compared to stat quo.

If he never existed and was sent down now in 2012 with views that were ahead of our times - how would you react?

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Nothing, other than the item I listed above. Then again humankind is a huge item :D

lol. My undertstanding of the list is the following.. Am I incorrect?

"If the 'essence of morality' is giving your wife a light beating when you think she has misbehaved, punishing people who dare to have sex outside marriage, stoning homosexuals to death, and executing people who dare to question a belief system enough to leave it - well, you can have that morality for yourself."

I would start by saying that you have viewed these through the moral lense you currently have as opposed to taking a step back and using reason.

Secondly:

1) Wife beating is wrong.
2) Cheating during a committed relationship should be punished.
3) Execution for those who question a belief system to leave it is wrong.
4) I know not enough about 4) to have a reasoned opinion.

[Robert]

Okay then. Let's say I accept this. Presuming I had said the latter, would the reaction have been much different? Probably not - what Robert has said about belief systems and the fear surrounding them is spot on.

An ex-boss of mine would ask me questions about my belief structure - pushing my nose against the wall of my world, if you like. But I'm not scared of the wall. It can't fall on my head and crush me - after all, it's only made of words - mere sound vibrations in the air.

So I took my word-wall down, and rebuilt it in a different place.

Some people get so angry and scared when you push their nose into their belief-wall that they will actually try to kill you in order to avoid looking at it. Fancy that! They would commit murder, rather than think critically about what they believe.

[Robert]

If not now then what makes you so sure that you wouldn't be so adamant about your views back in the days?


I'm not adamant in my views now.

In the Bronze Age I would not have had access to education and all the pluralist thought-models which I can apply as a modern person, so an extremely charismatic man would find it so easy to persuade me to believe his Big Story. Same with Jesus before him, or the Buddha before either of them.

[MR__KHAN__JI]

I'm not adamant in my views now.

In the Bronze Age I would not have had access to education and all the pluralist thought-models which I can apply as a modern person, so an extremely charismatic man would find it so easy to persuade me to believe his Big Story. Same with Jesus before him, or the Buddha before either of them.

:)

You didn't follow up on my discussion in respect of modern thought in another thread.

[iZaman]

A question that often haunts me - for I most likely know the answer.

Think about this for a minute.

You are busy living your life, day to day, doing your business, following what your forefathers have taught you in religion.

You have your own group of friends, your politicking, and your own forms of sport.

Suddenly, a man amongst you declares that he is a Prophet of God and is here to warn you and change your ways.

What do you do?

Would any of us have been strong enough to leave our families, our ways of life, our daily comforts?

Would we brave and wise enough to step back and think about what he is saying? Or would we have called him a mad-man along with the majority of the people.

Would we have recognised that he has always been truthful before this, or would we have blamed him for witchcraft and magic?


One answer to this question would be to look at yourself.

Ask yourself.
Do you really follow Islam, Do you really follow "Obey God and Obey the messenger and those charged with authority among you"

Do you really accept the truth by heart? If you do, do you do as God wants you to do? a true model is infront of you in shape of the Prophet, Do you think you try to remodel yourself to the way God wants instead of trying to model God and religion in to 'your' way and 'your' understandings which is to interpret things you 'want' them to be.

Would you really continue to preach/believe in Islam under hard-circumstances like Bilal (RA) faced? Continuing to say Ahad while being tortured to hell.

If the answer is yes, then you could be happy.

[inzy_paratha]

The only people who get angry when you criticize Islam are either hypersensitive, or are those who do not have enough knowledge about their own faith to refute said criticism, so are insecure about their own faith.
The Islamic tradition has historically been to invite discussion and debate, as opposed to the historically Christian tradition (with all due respect) of suppressing it. It is only recently due to a disintegrating of Islamic society and a move towards tradition rather than understanding.
I would argue a return to the tradition of people understanding the core beliefs of their faith would be the first steps of Islamic civilization rising again. At any rate people should deal with criticism with debate rather than slurs, I for one am open to any questions or discussion on the matter.

[MR__KHAN__JI]

The only people who get angry when you criticize Islam are either hypersensitive, or are those who do not have enough knowledge about their own faith to refute said criticism, so are insecure about their own faith.
The Islamic tradition has historically been to invite discussion and debate, as opposed to the historically Christian tradition (with all due respect) of suppressing it. It is only recently due to a disintegrating of Islamic society and a move towards tradition rather than understanding.
I would argue a return to the tradition of people understanding the core beliefs of their faith would be the first steps of Islamic civilization rising again. At any rate people should deal with criticism with debate rather than slurs, I for one am open to any questions or discussion on the matter.

Very well said.

If we are not able to articulate our view... Our view doesnt mean very much.

[James]

The only people who get angry when you criticize Islam are either hypersensitive, or are those who do not have enough knowledge about their own faith to refute said criticism, so are insecure about their own faith.
The Islamic tradition has historically been to invite discussion and debate, as opposed to the historically Christian tradition (with all due respect) of suppressing it. It is only recently due to a disintegrating of Islamic society and a move towards tradition rather than understanding.
I would argue a return to the tradition of people understanding the core beliefs of their faith would be the first steps of Islamic civilization rising again. At any rate people should deal with criticism with debate rather than slurs, I for one am open to any questions or discussion on the matter.

Thanks mate. Great post :)

[MalikMohsin]

Islam welcomes the constructive criticism, but better to participate in new new thread that is related to what they have question for. Better not derail this thread. Thank you.

As Salaamu Alaykum!

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?p=4757233#post4757233

[Ace Base]

Yes I have read it. The Qur'an is part of my current written thesis on censorship in literature.

How can a man not have written it? I can see no logical pathway that would persuade you to say that about any book.

If the 'essence of morality' is giving your wife a light beating when you think she has misbehaved, punishing people who dare to have sex outside marriage, stoning homosexuals to death, and executing people who dare to question a belief system enough to leave it - well, you can have that morality for yourself. I will shape my own humanist morality by reading more widely.

I do NOT consider you a liar so I shall assume you are merely confused.

Where in the Quran does it prescribe ''stoning homosexuals to death, and executing people who dare to question a belief system enough to leave it?''

Have you really read the Qura'an?

You mean you have read a translation of its meaning.

You see, James, you may have your ideas on morality or gods or religions or ideology but over a billion people on this earth are in your books ''misguided'' enough to follow Islam. Yes, the popularity of something does not make it the Truth but my point is this:

Since there are so many Muslims upon the earth surely it would be better for you and other non-Muslims to try and understand the religion of Islam better rather than repeat tired cliches about what you perceive the religion is.

Similarly, Muslims should make a concerted attempt to try and understand people of other faiths or non-faiths better and find commonalities between themselves (as the Quraan suggests; but I'm sure you've read that right, James?).

You see, it is when people walk in each others shoes, when they empathise that they will connect. And empathy is what will make the world a more peaceful place.

[chaiwala]

If I was anything like I am now, I strongly doubt it. The only reason I was ever Muslim was because I was born into it. And even that didn't last long.

[James]

Ace Base - severe punishment possibly death for homosexuality and apostasy are not things I have conjured in my head. Granted, scholars such as Maududi (who says it does) and Rahman (who says it possibly doesn't) have disagreed on whether or not the Qur'an sanctions earthly punishments for acts such as these. Myself - I hold that there is no smoke without fire - why have words been interpreted in such a way?

Please don't accuse me of not reading the Qur'an. I don't put writing in the public domain in my name (a chapter of my thesis) without reading the book involved and reading around it. I operate on the Internet in the same way - everything I write is something I believe I can argue, but I am always open to debate and challenge.

With the Holy Text, I use M.A.S. Abdel Haleem's translation, which is generally regarded as objective and excellent. After the paper has been marked (it is actually nothing to do with morality, but censorship) I will be happy to share it with you if my University allows this.

But I agree on your point about empathy, it is something for us all to take on board.

[azhar329]

^chaiwala; hope you dont mind me asking and feel free not to answer; it seems as if you no longer consider yourself a muslim, if my assumption is correct can I ask you why/what happened etc ?

Thank you.

[Ace Base]

Ace Base - severe punishment possibly death for homosexuality and apostasy are not things I have conjured in my head. Granted, scholars such as Maududi (who says it does) and Rahman (who says it possibly doesn't) have disagreed on whether or not the Qur'an sanctions earthly punishments for acts such as these. Myself - I hold that there is no smoke without fire - why have words been interpreted in such a way?

Please don't accuse me of not reading the Qur'an. I don't put writing in the public domain in my name (a chapter of my thesis) without reading the book involved and reading around it. I operate on the Internet in the same way - everything I write is something I believe I can argue, but I am always open to debate and challenge.

With the Holy Text, I use M.A.S. Abdel Haleem's translation, which is generally regarded as objective and excellent. After the paper has been marked (it is actually nothing to do with morality, but censorship) I will be happy to share it with you if my University allows this.

But I agree on your point about empathy, it is something for us all to take on board.

My dear chap, please just point me to the relevant verses.

Do they exist in the Quran or not?

[chaiwala]

^chaiwala; hope you dont mind me asking and feel free not to answer; it seems as if you no longer consider yourself a muslim, if my assumption is correct can I ask you why/what happened etc ?

Thank you.

Your assumption is correct. I don't wish to divert the topic too much though. But essentially a period consisting of introspection, doubt, and several external influences caused me to loose all faith in Islam, and religion in general.

[PakPrince]

Once the Prophet PBUH asked the people of Makkah that if he tells them that an army is about to attack them from behind the mountains will they believe him? Everyone said yes because his repuation as an honest and truthful guy was unparalleled.
But when Prophet PBUH told them that Islam is the truth most couldn't come to say yes, not beacuse it did not make sense or sth like that but because of their ego.
I'd like to think that I dont have such an ego so as to not accept that my forefathers could be wrong.

Abu Talib was on his deathbed and the Prophet asked him to just say the kalima and he will get jannah but his reply was that if he accepts Islam the people of Makkah will call him weak

[Ace Base]

James, just to clarify, I am asking you to provide a reference from the Quran for this:

''...stoning homosexuals to death, and executing people who dare to question a belief system enough to leave it?''

Thank you

[azhar329]

Your assumption is correct. I don't wish to divert the topic too much though. But essentially a period consisting of introspection, doubt, and several external influences caused me to loose all faith in Islam, and religion in general.

Ok no prob, may Allah guide you back to the Truth bro, ameen.

[James]

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Homosexuality

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Apostasy

[Ace Base]

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Homosexuality

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Apostasy

James

You are a university student and are therefore familiar with research methodology and context.

My question still stands.

Where are the Quraanic verses which recommend ''stoning homosexuals to death, and executing people who dare to question a belief system enough to leave it?''?

Please quote to me the exact verses, thank you.

People make mistakes all the time, James. There is no shame in admitting when you are wrong. Indeed humility is the sign of a true scholar.

[James]

Dude, the interpretations have led on from the verses and text quoted in those links. Qur'anic verses, Hadith and scholarly views, though in the case of the latter I guess it only scratches the surface.

Agreed humility is the sign of a true scholar but I am nowhere near good enough at any of this to call myself a true scholar of anything yet. Also this is how I understand matters up to now, and there is evidence to back up what I said, so I don't know what else you'd like me to contribute at this time. Though I am always eager to be disproved as it is how I learn things.

[sticky wicket]

Yes I have read it. The Qur'an is part of my current written thesis on censorship in literature.

How can a man not have written it? I can see no logical pathway that would persuade you to say that about any book.

If the 'essence of morality' is giving your wife a light beating when you think she has misbehaved, punishing people who dare to have sex outside marriage, stoning homosexuals to death, and executing people who dare to question a belief system enough to leave it - well, you can have that morality for yourself. I will shape my own humanist morality by reading more widely.

Hi James, I'd just like to address the points of "morality" which you mention as an indication that the Quran cannot be the word of God.

1. re the "light beating" of the wife - the translation is more suited to mean "to seperate" or "to part" in this context. If you care to read this link for a explanation.http://www.answering-christianity.com/beating_no.htm

2. Stoning to death of homosexuals is not a Quranic punishment. please read here for some reasons why some muslims have adopted this biblical punishment http://www.islamicperspectives.com/Stoning5.htm#Chapter5

3. There is no Quranic punishment for leaving islam. This link has more details http://www.islamicperspectives.com/Apostasy1.htm

Re the OP I believe the people were on the lookout for "that prophet" as prophesised in the earlier scriptures so the arrival of Muhammad may not have been such a surprise.

[James]

Thankyou, I will read the links and we will discuss them.

BTW I never said that I believe the Qur'an is not the word of God because I disagree with some aspects of Islam. I would say we are free to question the origins of scripture for other reasons. Now if it is the word of God, which it might be, then I would also like to debate with Him over the parts I couldn't take on board ;-)

'O my body, make of me always a man who questions' (Fanon)

[Ace Base]

Dude, the interpretations have led on from the verses and text quoted in those links. Qur'anic verses, Hadith and scholarly views, though in the case of the latter I guess it only scratches the surface.

Agreed humility is the sign of a true scholar but I am nowhere near good enough at any of this to call myself a true scholar of anything yet. Also this is how I understand matters up to now, and there is evidence to back up what I said, so I don't know what else you'd like me to contribute at this time. Though I am always eager to be disproved as it is how I learn things.

James

Forget hadith. If you don't believe in Prophet Muhammed why do you care about what he may or may not have said?

We are dealing with the Qur'an here.

You seemed to imply that the Qur'an prescribes punishments for apostasy and homosexuality. I asked you to quote me the verses which suggest this. You have not done this so far.

You shall not be able to do so because no search verses exist.

There is always a difference between what is written and what we think we read. Its called perception. And perception is rarely objective.

Just for the record I believe homosexuality and adultery, if proven in a court of law are both punishable by death.

But none of these punishments can be derived from the Qur'an as you seem to be implying.

Please do not view my enquiry as trying to question your integrity.

I consider you a ''friend'' of Islam and I have mentioned this once before in a separate thread on this forum. It is young, intelligent people like you that I believe will help build bridges between Muslims and the other communities in this country.

But if our friends will mistakenly repeat tired cliches used by the opponents of Islam and Muslims then how will they successfully defend Islam from unfair, Islamophobic attacks?

[James]

Sir I would always defend Islam from unfair Islamophobic attacks. In fact, I have done so before. In Yorkshire we have a great many ignorant white people, who often equate Islam with being purely a religion followed by those of Asian ethnicity and know very little about either topic. In some ways I am ignorant too, but I try to educate myself as best I can, certainly on race and religion which are huge social issues.

I believe public misconceptions about Islam to be one of the biggest and potentially most dangerous problems facing Western multicultural society today. Islam is to me one of the greatest religions in existence and the Qur'an is a brilliant book. Whether inspired by the teachings of God or the thoughts of humankind.

I accept that my strong and sometimes dissenting style of debate is not to everyone's tastes but as I always say, I will never publish something in writing or on the Internet unless I believe it can be argued. For me there is no Truth - only evidence and reason, that perhaps suggests things to be correct. If people wish to complain about me because I sometimes disagree with their world view, that is fine. But I will defend myself in turn, and it has been particularly disconcerting to see one inflammatory comment elsewhere which I have dealt with.

But RE this debate, remember that Hadith greatly help us understand Qur'an and sunnah. if I have come to a conclusion about interpretation and its practice from doing all the reading I have seen up to now, that is where I am on the issue in this moment. I believe in cause-and-effect and the Qur'an is open to appraisal and criticism just like any other text. To me anyway - I have not (yet) submitted to it.

NB I use the word submission in a positive sense here. I enjoy many suras, I would like to accept God as understood by Islam - but I can't quite get there with the Qur'an. I disagree with too much of it morally, though not as often as I do with the Bible. I am technically still a Christian but a disillusioned one to say the least...

[azhar329]

Sir I would always defend Islam from unfair Islamophobic attacks. In fact, I have done so before.

Thank you James for your efforts and may Allah bless you with the Truth, ameen.

[Ace Base]

Sir I would always defend Islam from unfair Islamophobic attacks. In fact, I have done so before. In Yorkshire we have a great many ignorant white people, who often equate Islam with being of Asian ethnicity and know very little about either. In some ways I am ignorant too, but I try to educate myself as best I can, certainly on race and religion which are huge social issues.

I believe public misconceptions about Islam to be one of the greatest problems facing Western multicultural society today. It is to me one of the greatest religions in existence and the Qur'an is a brilliant book. Whether inspired by the teachings of God or the thoughts of humankind.

I accept that my strong and sometimes dissenting style of debate is not to everyone's tastes but as I always say, I will never publish something in writing or on the Internet unless I believe it can be argued. For me there is no Truth - only evidence and reason, that perhaps suggests things to be correct. If people wish to complain about this approach because it disagrees with their world view, that is fine. But I will defend myself in turn.

But RE this debate, remember that Hadith greatly help us understand Qur'an and sunnah. if I have come to a conclusion about interpretation and its practice from doing all the reading I have seen up to now, that is where I am on the issue in this moment. I believe in cause-and-effect and the Qur'an is open to appraisal and criticism just like any other text. To me anyway - I have not (yet) submitted to it.

NB I use the word submission in a positive sense here. I enjoy many suras, I would like to accept God as understood by Islam - but I can't quite get there with the Qur'an. I disagree with too much of it morally, though not as often as I do with the Bible. I am technically still a Christian but a disillusioned one to say the least...

James

I have never expected anything less from you.

I have always held you in high regard. To disagree with an ideology or a belief-system does not mean you disrespect it and I quite understand that.

In my eyes, if a belief system cannot stand up to rigid, scientific, social and intellectual scrutiny then that belief-system is false regardless of how much the adherents to that system believe in its truth.

I disagree with Christianity but I would (and do) defend it vehemently against the malicious lies of some atheists who try and imply that some teachings within the religion are responsible for priests behaving inappropriately against children.

What about the 99.99% who go about their lives in a decent, God-fearing manner?

Similarly, I would defend the atheists against the ill-informed attacks of a Muslim who claims that all atheists are sexually-deviant, selfish and self-centred because this is simply not true.

At the end of the day, attacking another person's beliefs does not make your own belief any truer.

Empathy. Justice. This is what Islam teaches and this is what other religions teach. If only we actually followed our religions properly...

[Bilal7]

Sir I would always defend Islam from unfair Islamophobic attacks. In fact, I have done so before. In Yorkshire we have a great many ignorant white people, who often equate Islam with being purely a religion followed by those of Asian ethnicity and know very little about either topic. In some ways I am ignorant too, but I try to educate myself as best I can, certainly on race and religion which are huge social issues.

I believe public misconceptions about Islam to be one of the biggest and potentially most dangerous problems facing Western multicultural society today. Islam is to me one of the greatest religions in existence and the Qur'an is a brilliant book. Whether inspired by the teachings of God or the thoughts of humankind.

I accept that my strong and sometimes dissenting style of debate is not to everyone's tastes but as I always say, I will never publish something in writing or on the Internet unless I believe it can be argued. For me there is no Truth - only evidence and reason, that perhaps suggests things to be correct. If people wish to complain about me because I sometimes disagree with their world view, that is fine. But I will defend myself in turn, and it has been particularly disconcerting to see one inflammatory comment elsewhere which I have dealt with.

But RE this debate, remember that Hadith greatly help us understand Qur'an and sunnah. if I have come to a conclusion about interpretation and its practice from doing all the reading I have seen up to now, that is where I am on the issue in this moment. I believe in cause-and-effect and the Qur'an is open to appraisal and criticism just like any other text. To me anyway - I have not (yet) submitted to it.

NB I use the word submission in a positive sense here. I enjoy many suras, I would like to accept God as understood by Islam - but I can't quite get there with the Qur'an. I disagree with too much of it morally, though not as often as I do with the Bible. I am technically still a Christian but a disillusioned one to say the least...

Thank you for the support.

Just one point:

The Quran does lay out a few open challenges. More or less to the meaning of:

1) Produce just a surah like it.
2) If it were written by a man, you would find many contradictions and faults in it.

No one has produced a chapter, like a chapter in the Quran and no one has found any contradiction in it either.
Not to mention all the scientific facts or miracles listed in the Quran, which was revealed 1400 years ago.

[Prince_Pathan]

why is every thread i visit a verbal battle between azhar and whippy lol

[Black Zero]

A question that often haunts me - for I most likely know the answer.

Think about this for a minute.

You are busy living your life, day to day, doing your business, following what your forefathers have taught you in religion.

You have your own group of friends, your politicking, and your own forms of sport.

Suddenly, a man amongst you declares that he is a Prophet of God and is here to warn you and change your ways.

What do you do?

Would any of us have been strong enough to leave our families, our ways of life, our daily comforts?

Would we brave and wise enough to step back and think about what he is saying? Or would we have called him a mad-man along with the majority of the people.

Would we have recognised that he has always been truthful before this, or would we have blamed him for witchcraft and magic?

Historically, prophets were teachers.
and we humans now need more prophets...

Prophet by Khalil Jibran sold over 100 million copies it clearly shows that human needs prophets.

[Namak_Halaal]

I would have simply asked Mohammed (PBUH) to perform a miracle. What better miracle than the Qur'an.

Remember folks, it's not the content of the Qur'an that convinced people Mohammed (PBUH) was a messenger of God, but the language and prose of the Qur'an.

This is precisly why it didn't matter whether one was illiterate, one was uneducated, one was scientist, all muslims at the time had to do was 'listen'.

[Ace Base]

I would have simply asked Mohammed (PBUH) to perform a miracle. What better miracle than the Qur'an.

Remember folks, it's not the content of the Qur'an that convinced people Mohammed (PBUH) was a messenger of God, but the language and prose of the Qur'an.

This is precisly why it didn't matter whether one was illiterate, one was uneducated, one was scientist, all muslims at the time had to do was 'listen'.

Easily one of the best posts in this thread.

As my close friend Rabbi Lee Weissman says, ''its rarely a question of whether or not you have faith rather who or what you have faith in...''

[bmwduran]

I would have simply asked Mohammed (PBUH) to perform a miracle. What better miracle than the Qur'an.

Remember folks, it's not the content of the Qur'an that convinced people Mohammed (PBUH) was a messenger of God, but the language and prose of the Qur'an.

This is precisly why it didn't matter whether one was illiterate, one was uneducated, one was scientist, all muslims at the time had to do was 'listen'.

Hinda and Abu Laheb knew that this was not a language of his own, but that he was getting it from somewhere else, you have put this so easily in today's era, but, it would not have been that easy back then. There were some who never asked for a miracle,

The kufaars knew about his integrity and his prophethood, but, they did not want to admit because of the harm Islam was going to do on their trade. Theybhad a business going in Mecca, people wud pay tributes to the idols and they saw Islam pulling a plug to that,

Hinda herself wondered how this man goes to mountain and comes back with prose that was never heard of, yet, she was one of the biggest enemies of Islam. The point i am making is there are so many variables then what you just mentiined. Some came to him thru listening to Koran, some saw his ethics, Bilal RA saw the equality given to him by the Prophet. Kalma told Bilal that there was no other Allah on this planet but Allah, which for him meant that the owner of Bilal was a mere human, and also that Bilal was as human as any other on the planet. Before, this he considered himself a sub human, As Maulana Roomi puts it really well, there are as many ways to Allah as there are souls on this planet.

And how do you know that we would have really become muslims back then and not the kufaars?

[bmwduran]

Historically, prophets were teachers.
and we humans now need more prophets...

Prophet by Khalil Jibran sold over 100 million copies it clearly shows that human needs prophets.

Prophet Mohammed peace be upon him is enough for us till eternity, the issue is we dont want to live our lives by the rules of the prophets, yet, we wait for more,

[Black Zero]

Prophet Mohammed peace be upon him is enough for us till eternity, the issue is we dont want to live our lives by the rules of the prophets, yet, we wait for more,

Thats a belief
and my belief if that we need over 100,000/- prophets to have an adequate coverage..

We need someone to have a direct communication with...


(from a different perspective, if shiatan(s) is/are alive and kicking we need a alive prophet(s) too)

whoever got the true message is a prophet to me.

[Saqs]

Wow.

Such a grand derailment of a thread. And that too by a mod.

[Robert]

It's come back on track though.

[NJamal]

Thats a belief
and my belief if that we need over 100,000/- prophets to have an adequate coverage..

We need someone to have a direct communication with...


(from a different perspective, if shiatan(s) is/are alive and kicking we need a alive prophet(s) too)

whoever got the true message is a prophet to me.

But mate as Muslims we have word of ALLAH the Quran for our guidance against the evil designs of Shaitaan.

[James]

Saqib - my original point was in reference to the OP. And after a little debate I actually said half way through that I would step out so the OP could return to the fore, but things went a different way again. The OP is back on now though.

[Saqs]

Yeah. Fair enough.

Your original post about the "construct of the individual" was rather interesting.

Can you expand on that idea? Am I wrong in assuming you attribute mass conversions to a certain religion in the old days to groupthink?

[mithun_minhas]

If any person today would come to you with a beautiful literature of a new religion and explain it to you about its virtues, would you follow him and leave what has been handed over to you over generations?

We would think of him as a mad man and would even blast him.

Sure, there will be some followers for that guy who fall for him easily. Those people have troubled lives and are always on look out for someone who could save them.

There are so many new cults that are born every year in various parts of the world. Most would fadeaway after a couple of years. The reason is that people these days ask for evidence which the God Man or Messenger fails to provide. All he has is his word of mouth.

[DeadlyVenom]

A question that often haunts me

It haunts me too. A lot.

I often ponder over this and similar scenarios, wondering what I would do and how I would act.

Obviously it being a purely hypothetical question I can't come to an answer but just thinking about it softens my stance on the non-muslims will all automatically go to hell debate.

[Imran_A]

It haunts me too. A lot.

I often ponder over this and similar scenarios, wondering what I would do and how I would act.

Obviously it being a purely hypothetical question I can't come to an answer but just thinking about it softens my stance on the non-muslims will all automatically go to hell debate.

How very kind of you. My non-muslim friends will be absolutely thrilled to hear it!

[DeadlyVenom]

No need for Sarcasm mate.

[James]

Yeah. Fair enough.

Your original post about the "construct of the individual" was rather interesting.

Can you expand on that idea? Am I wrong in assuming you attribute mass conversions to a certain religion in the old days to groupthink?

The individual has only been a popular existential concept since the Renaissance. Throw in the rise of capitalism and democracy across the world and we now all feel quite self-important, and are more likely to act independently with our own interests at heart.

As far as group behaviours go, we are more interested in the latest designer clothing label than a new religion now. Materialism has replaced spirituality for many. That's a shame, in a way, because the birth of Christianity or Islam (though one would not have realised their historical impact, of course) would have been quite something to witness.

[James]

How very kind of you. My non-muslim friends will be absolutely thrilled to hear it!

Hey mate, DV is a good lad :)

[Imran_A]

Never said he wasnt. I was just having a bit of fun. :)

[Bilal7]

If any person today would come to you with a beautiful literature of a new religion and explain it to you about its virtues, would you follow him and leave what has been handed over to you over generations?

We would think of him as a mad man and would even blast him.

Sure, there will be some followers for that guy who fall for him easily. Those people have troubled lives and are always on look out for someone who could save them.

There are so many new cults that are born every year in various parts of the world. Most would fadeaway after a couple of years. The reason is that people these days ask for evidence which the God Man or Messenger fails to provide. All he has is his word of mouth.

You are right, but the Prophet (pbuh) did indeed have much more than his word of mouth.

[Garuda]

Not then not now.

Reason : Same as others who didn't follow him that time. If miracle is only way to be considered as someone god send then the a magician, a scientist who flew a aeroplane, who replaced a heart, who went to moon are all shown miracles.

As long as I haven't got the frequency that convince me otherwise, I want to believe there has been no one sent from god yet. There has been no god sent religion yet.

[Black Zero]

But mate as Muslims we have word of ALLAH the Quran for our guidance against the evil designs of Shaitaan.

some (like me) still need one to one interactions...

you just can't beat this level of communication...

(We do not need to worry about which tafseer is accurate or which Hadees is weak, strong, or doubtful)

[Bilal7]

some (like me) still need one to one interactions...

you just can't beat this level of communication...

(We do not need to worry about which tafseer is accurate or which Hadees is weak, strong, or doubtful)

Imams, learned, honest, practising Imams.

[Saqs]

The individual has only been a popular existential concept since the Renaissance. Throw in the rise of capitalism and democracy across the world and we now all feel quite self-important, and are more likely to act independently with our own interests at heart.

As far as group behaviours go, we are more interested in the latest designer clothing label than a new religion now. Materialism has replaced spirituality for many. That's a shame, in a way, because the birth of Christianity or Islam (though one would not have realised their historical impact, of course) would have been quite something to witness.

That may be, but even in those times, there were individuals (Hanafis) doing their own thing - the Prophet ofcourse being one of them.

The very first commandment revealed was "Read" - it is an imploration for each and every individual to read and teach him/herself.

There is a recurring pattern of 'saving your own soul' in Islam - which requires the individual to break away from the group, if the said group is in the wrong, even if that group is related to you by blood.

[iZaman]

Not then not now.

Reason : Same as others who didn't follow him that time. If miracle is only way to be considered as someone god send then the a magician, a scientist who flew a aeroplane, who replaced a heart, who went to moon are all shown miracles.

As long as I haven't got the frequency that convince me otherwise, I want to believe there has been no one sent from god yet. There has been no god sent religion yet.

Beg my pardon but miracles was not what persuaded the Meccans to accept Islam.
It was for 40 years, his perseverance, attitude, which led him to be called 'Al-Sadiq' (Truthful) and 'Al-Amin' (Trustworthy' in the Mecccan society.
He could go and tell the Meccans to prepare for an Army which awaited on the hill besides Mecca and the Meccans wouldn't doubt what they heard.
It was only after the Prophethood that Muslims including him faced persecutions and they were only a handful who accepted Islam.
It was not miracles what persuaded the people, it was the character of the person, the unusual degree of forgiving/honesty/spirituality.
I can't really explain this all briefly but to summarize, It wasn't the miracles which persuaded Meccans. Those were only an addition to the divine message.

I would advise you to read an 'Islamic version' or Islam's History.

[Bilal7]

^ Not to mention that he wanted no personal gain in the material world.

[Saqs]

To add to Jeeway - the Prophet was actually accused by the naysayers that he had no miracles, unlike his predecessor Prophets.

The Qur'an is his main miracle.

[Garuda]

Beg my pardon but miracles was not what persuaded the Meccans to accept Islam.
It was for 40 years, his perseverance, attitude, which led him to be called 'Al-Sadiq' (Truthful) and 'Al-Amin' (Trustworthy' in the Mecccan society.
He could go and tell the Meccans to prepare for an Army which awaited on the hill besides Mecca and the Meccans wouldn't doubt what they heard.
It was only after the Prophethood that Muslims including him faced persecutions and they were only a handful who accepted Islam.
It was not miracles what persuaded the people, it was the character of the person, the unusual degree of forgiving/honesty/spirituality.
I can't really explain this all briefly but to summarize, It wasn't the miracles which persuaded Meccans. Those were only an addition to the divine message.

I would advise you to read an 'Islamic version' or Islam's History.
Good to know that it was not miracles.

Now could you provide some points he showed it those 40 points which would convince one that he is not just a smart human but a god send prophet ?

[inzy_paratha]

James, one thing I would like to bring to your attention regarding Islamic law is that in Shariah, the state has no right to interfere in what a man does in his own home . There was a hadith which was narrated to me by a scholar which was about the second Caliph Umar (may allah be pleased with him). The hadith is along the lines that Umar was doing his nightly rounds, and he heard some noises from someones yard . He peeked over and caught the man doing some wrongdoing of a sort (do not remember exactly what), and said something along the lines of shame on you for doing such and such, whereas the man replied shame on you for spying on me. Umar upon hearing this grew embarrassed , and said something along the lines of you are forgiven if I am ! (Busy right now but will try to get the exact quote for you when I have more time!)

Punishments for thing such as Homosexuality etc are mostly to do with people who are flaunting it in the public domain, and as such risking corrupting society or spreading things to innocent children which is not necessarily good for them. This is not limited to sexual acts only between males, any sexual acts in public are not allowed. Even things like apostasy etc, how will the state know your personal beliefs sexuality etc unless you are flaunting it around? As long as you keep yourself to yourself you will be fine , and even in the rare cases where someone is being convicted judges are encouraged to show mercy where they cane.

So where Shariah comes in is trying to remove such undesirable elements from the public domain, things like homosexuality (which may cause aids, and if spread widely enough can lead to a society dying out ) and apostasy (which is basically the western equivalent of treasons, i.e leaving the faith and inciting people to do so, or plotting against your people , that is what apostasy actually refers too , and is similarly punished in most countries today)

As long as people are keeping their private affairs private they have nothing to worry about :)

[inzy_paratha]

Sorry for going off topic again mods, just wanted to make this one point which I felt was important :)

[mithun_minhas]

James, one thing I would like to bring to your attention regarding Islamic law is that in Shariah, the state has no right to interfere in what a man does in his own home . There was a hadith which was narrated to me by a scholar which was about the second Caliph Umar (may allah be pleased with him). The hadith is along the lines that Umar was doing his nightly rounds, and he heard some noises from someones yard . He peeked over and caught the man doing some wrongdoing of a sort (do not remember exactly what), and said something along the lines of shame on you for doing such and such, whereas the man replied shame on you for spying on me. Umar upon hearing this grew embarrassed , and said something along the lines of you are forgiven if I am ! (Busy right now but will try to get the exact quote for you when I have more time!)

Punishments for thing such as Homosexuality etc are mostly to do with people who are flaunting it in the public domain, and as such risking corrupting society or spreading things to innocent children which is not necessarily good for them. This is not limited to sexual acts only between males, any sexual acts in public are not allowed. Even things like apostasy etc, how will the state know your personal beliefs sexuality etc unless you are flaunting it around? As long as you keep yourself to yourself you will be fine , and even in the rare cases where someone is being convicted judges are encouraged to show mercy where they cane.

So where Shariah comes in is trying to remove such undesirable elements from the public domain, things like homosexuality (which may cause aids, and if spread widely enough can lead to a society dying out ) and apostasy (which is basically the western equivalent of treasons, i.e leaving the faith and inciting people to do so, or plotting against your people , that is what apostasy actually refers too , and is similarly punished in most countries today)

As long as people are keeping their private affairs private they have nothing to worry about :)


Is it ok to practice homosexuality at home then? :ahmed

Also, regarding apostasy, Someone posted that Islam does not force people to follow it. So why punish people who leave Islam?

[inzy_paratha]

Its not ok if you are a muslim, you are incurring sin...but as far as the state goes they aren't going to punish you for something you do in private, as they dont go snooping around peoples homes .
Apostasy laws were for the people that left Islam and spread unrest in the lands, by either spreading an anti Islam message, or conspiring with non muslims against the muslims. As I said before, people can have their personal beliefs without the state knowing...state cant read minds. The harsh punishments are just in place for the really serious cases of treason against the state, even when it comes to someone who has converted and is inciting unrest in the land by speaking against Islam,there is room to be forgiven .

[Garuda]

Its not ok if you are a muslim, you are incurring sin...but as far as the state goes they aren't going to punish you for something you do in private, as they dont go snooping around peoples homes .
Apostasy laws were for the people that left Islam and spread unrest in the lands, by either spreading an anti Islam message, or conspiring with non muslims against the muslims. As I said before, people can have their personal beliefs without the state knowing...state cant read minds. The harsh punishments are just in place for the really serious cases of treason against the state, even when it comes to someone who has converted and is inciting unrest in the land by speaking against Islam,there is room to be forgiven .

Would preaching another religion be considered as spreading anti islam message?

[mithun_minhas]

Its not ok if you are a muslim, you are incurring sin...but as far as the state goes they aren't going to punish you for something you do in private, as they dont go snooping around peoples homes .
Apostasy laws were for the people that left Islam and spread unrest in the lands, by either spreading an anti Islam message, or conspiring with non muslims against the muslims. As I said before, people can have their personal beliefs without the state knowing...state cant read minds. The harsh punishments are just in place for the really serious cases of treason against the state, even when it comes to someone who has converted and is inciting unrest in the land by speaking against Islam,there is room to be forgiven .

Is it ok to peacefully convert people without spreading hatred towards Islam?

Sorry, I am asking so many questions, but since you are answering, I am asking :waqar

[Bilal7]

Would preaching another religion be considered as spreading anti islam message?

Is it ok to peacefully convert people without spreading hatred towards Islam?

Sorry, I am asking so many questions, but since you are answering, I am asking :waqar

Preaching another religion would not be an un-Islamic message. Converting to another religion and then spreading lies about Islam to people who would believe you, because you once were a Muslim is spreading an anti Islam message.

[iZeeshan]

Yes I have read it. The Qur'an is part of my current written thesis on censorship in literature.

How can a man not have written it? I can see no logical pathway that would persuade you to say that about any book.

If the 'essence of morality' is giving your wife a light beating when you think she has misbehaved, punishing people who dare to have sex outside marriage, stoning homosexuals to death, and executing people who dare to question a belief system enough to leave it - well, you can have that morality for yourself. I will shape my own humanist morality by reading more widely.

I think this will address your concerns. It certainly removed any doubts in my mind.

http://myafrica.wordpress.com/2006/10/30/what-makes-muslims-believe-that-the-quran-is-not-written-by-prophet-muhammad/

[Imran_A]

I think this will address your concerns. It certainly removed any doubts in my mind.

http://myafrica.wordpress.com/2006/10/30/what-makes-muslims-believe-that-the-quran-is-not-written-by-prophet-muhammad/

I dont want to challenge the claim that Quran was written by Allah, but this article youve quoted is a big load of hokum. Here...

The Prophet was mentioned by name in the Quran only five times whereas Jesus Christ’s name was (honourably) mentioned 25 times. Could the Prophet go to such an extent of honouring someone more than himself if he had written the Quran?

*

There is a chapter in the Quran entitled and dedicated to “Mary”, the mother of Jesus Christ, while there is no chapter called, or dedicated to, the Prophet’s own mother, Aminah, or daughter, Fatimah, nor were their names mentioned in the Quran. Could this have happened if the Prophet was the author of the Quran?

Is he claiming the prophet was a selfish, self centered individual who couldnt give credit to someone else? Come on!

[DeadlyVenom]

I fail to see how you come to that conclusion Imran after reading that paragraph.

[KitKat]

If Prophet Mohammed had taken birth today he would have been an influential and prominent media figure or a corporate figure.

[iZeeshan]

I dont want to challenge the claim that Quran was written by Allah, but this article youve quoted is a big load of hokum. Here...



Is he claiming the prophet was a selfish, self centered individual who couldnt give credit to someone else? Come on!

Whether or not it is 'hokum' is for everyone to decide but it made enough decent points to convince me.

As for your conclusion about the Prophet, I don't see how you understood that that is what the article is stating. All it is saying that no human could write something that is regarded so fantastically and not give any credit to himself. Or at least, that's what I understood from it, and it makes sense to me.

Either way, the greatest point for me was that if the Prophet had written the Qur'an, why would he include phrases asking the disbelievers to reproduce something similar or saying that not all humans + jinns put together could reproduce something similar.

In addition, how can an illiterate man write something so beautiful and poetic that not even the best Arab poets could reproduce?

[Saqs]

Now could you provide some points he showed it those 40 points which would convince one that he is not just a smart human but a god send prophet ?

Don't need 40.

Just one.

The Qur'an.

Pick it up and read it.

Subtext - the Prophet was illiterate.

[Garuda]

Preaching another religion would not be an un-Islamic message. Converting to another religion and then spreading lies about Islam to people who would believe you, because you once were a Muslim is spreading an anti Islam message.

Sorry, but didn't get you there

If someone preaching a religion one doesn't need to lie about Islam.

Secondly if there is a preacher telling good things about say Budhism and people accept his preach and convert, will it be considered apostasy ?

To me, it doesn't a she is not talking anything about Islam here.

[youboy]

Is it ok to practice homosexuality at home then? :ahmed

Also, regarding apostasy, Someone posted that Islam does not force people to follow it. So why punish people who leave Islam?

How the state will know if someone is practicing homosexuality at home. Islam doesn't allow spying. So whatever they do in closed doors they are answerable to Allah and not to anyone.
If they come out tell everyone that they are homosexuals. So this is spreading bad thing in the society which have to be dealt with.

Sorry, but didn't get you there

If someone preaching a religion one doesn't need to lie about Islam.

Secondly if there is a preacher telling good things about say Budhism and people accept his preach and convert, will it be considered apostasy ?

To me, it doesn't a she is not talking anything about Islam here.

No it will not.

You are free to practice your religion as per Islam. If your religion says to spread the word of religion so nobody should stop you. Preaching any other religion will not be considered apostasy.

Apostasy rule applicable as described by Inzy_paratha

[Garuda]

No it will not.

You are free to practice your religion as per Islam. If your religion says to spread the word of religion so nobody should stop you. Preaching any other religion will not be considered apostasy.

Apostasy rule applicable as described by Inzy_paratha
Thanks dude.

If I am not wrong, in Soudi Arabia, preaching other religion is apostasy and attracts death penalty. If that's correct, then aren't they following un-islamic law ?

[youboy]

Thanks dude.

If I am not wrong, in Soudi Arabia, preaching other religion is apostasy and attracts death penalty. If that's correct, then aren't they following un-islamic law ?

No country currently represent Islamic role model.

[Imran_A]

No country currently represent Islamic role model.

Yes, youboy knows the one true Islamic model! Now if only we could get him an entire country from somewhere!!! :)

[Garuda]

No country currently represent Islamic role model.
So why do you think is the case ?

Is the model flawed and hence not a single country can follow it or it's not compatible with current age or some other reason ?

[Saqs]

It is a threat to the ruling party's way of life.

Wealth is to be shared with the people.

The leaders are to put all they earn in a common treasury which serves their people, and only get a salary at 'market levels' for the job they do.

Bribery and corruption is intolerable.

I could go on and on.

Basically, is is no ruling party's interest to implement the system properly (atleast none of the ruling parties that exist today).