Its not about what I believe, its what Muslims believe. For 1200 years they believed in Hadiths and Tafsirs now since society has changed and slavery has been banned they are trying to change their religion. I am just pointing out their intellectual dishonesty.
Sharia punishments are the best to deter all sorts of crimes.
- Thread starter saqibmkhan
- Start date
Its not about what I believe, its what Muslims believe. For 1200 years they believed in Hadiths and Tafsirs now since society has changed and slavery has been banned they are trying to change their religion. I am just pointing out their intellectual dishonesty.
Wake up Pak
(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم
At the same token the authenticity of the translation is not based on your likes or dislikes as well.
A mulhid who has almost zero understanding of the Quran can not be taken seriously.
As I said. Its not about you or me. Muslims have been following Tafsirs and Hadith since 1200 years. Now you have come along after 1200 years and started a different religion and calling it Islam. Just go to Pakistan and tell any Barelvi or Deoband that Bukhari is a liar and see what they will do to you.
Taalib-e-Haq
Voter (50+ posts)
You are arguing for the sake of argument. You are one to talk about intellectual dishonesty. All you do and have been doing is mistranslating Allah's Ayat and twisting their meanings to suit your agenda.
Brother you can go around in circles proving Muhammad is false, the Quran is a fake book qand all believing Muslims are backward.
The inference that I have provided is the correct exegesis and will stand for all time. The Arabic text is clear. You can change the translation all you want to satisfy your need to validate your own athiestic mindset and belief system.
I am not embarrassed one bit by what I said. We will do what the book tells us and not do what the book tells us as is. Apko ko kitab se masla hai, take it up with the author when you meet him inshaAllah.
Neither we doubt Allah, His Messenger or the Book of Allah that was revealed to the Last Messenger (SAWS).
May Allah guide you to the truth that you seek. Hope to see you fight in Allah's cause and be in Jannah one day with us. :)
I have, the versions go back to time of Muhammad or Usman or Umar only consist of few verses, then there are mushafs that we found after time of Usman such as Sanaa manuscript, they do not match Usman's Quran and the ones from 7th century also do not match. So the narrative that Usman canonized the Quran does not match what we find on ground. It seems Quran kept changing even after Usman and Sanaa Manuscript is a good example of it, both the bottom layer and upper layer are different from each other and from modern Quran.
Can you share to enlighten me on what holes you poked? I am actually very interesting to see the other perspective as I have not seen anyone give a credible response to Dan Gibson from the Muslim side
Nobody in the Islamic world gaves two hoots about research on Islam at all. You are not allowed to do any research in Saudi Arabia on ancient Islamic sites. You are not allowed to study old versions of Quran and if you try to question anything that is fed to you as part of Islamic Dogma you have your head chopped off. Only in the West can you do actual research on Islam.
Taalib-e-Haq
Voter (50+ posts)
And becoming intellectually dishonest yourself.
I agree with you on this point only that some modern Muslim apologists are changing their religion to fit in with your lot. It will not work. You and them will fail miserably in your respective causes.
Wake up Pak
(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم
If Muslims have been following wrong Tafasir and ahdeeth since 1200 years then they are responsible for their deeds.
Why are you equating the wrong tafsirs and ahdeeth to Islam? You just have an agenda to malign Islam and Muslims but many have tried in the past and many will try in the future but for your information Islam is on the march.
I am not translating them you are. I am simply quoting the authentic translations and Tafsirs.
We can settle once and and for all who is being intellectually dishonest
Quran 23:5-6
And they who guard their private parts - except with their wives or those ˹bondwomen˺ in their possession, for then they are free from blame,
Tafsir Ibn Kathir:
(And those who guard their private parts. Except from their wives and their right hand possessions, for then, they are free from blame. But whoever seeks beyond that, then those are the transgressors.) means, those who protect their private parts from unlawful actions and do not do that which Allah has forbidden; fornication and homosexuality, and do not approach anyone except the wives whom Allah has made permissible for them or their right hand possessions from the captives. One who seeks what Allah has made permissible for him is not to be blamed and there is no sin on him.
Reference from Sahih Bukhari:
Vol. 7-#137 Narrated Abu al-Khudri: "We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's messenger about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection.""
Vol. 3-#765
Narrated Kuraib: the freed slave of Ibn 'Abbas, that Maimuna bint Al-Harith told him that she manumitted a slave-girl without taking the permission of the Prophet. On the day when it was her turn to be with the Prophet, she said, "Do you know, O Allah's Apostle, that I have manumitted my slave-girl?" He said, "Have you really?" She replied in the affirmative. He said, "You would have got more reward if you had given her (i.e. the slave-girl) to one of your maternal uncles."
Vol. 5-#512 Narrated Anas: ".....The prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives...."
There are dozens of other Bukhari hadiths which show Muhammad and other Muslims owned slaves and having sex with their slaves.
That is your claim. Muslims disagree with you. Same thing Qadianis say about non Qadianis that they had been following wrong Islam. It really doesnt matter what you personally think, in the Eyes of Muslims you are just another Firqa or another Religion.
If both of us went to a Barelvi mosque in Pakistan the fate of both us would be the same, a Mulhid and a heretic.
After discovery of big bang by scientists the translation of Quran some how mysteriously changed from "Expanse" meaning vaste.... to "Expanding"
And now after slavery is banned everywhere, the translations and exegesis have somehow mysteriously changed to show that slavery is haram.
After believing in something for 1200 years people are changing Tafsirs and Translation to suite the agenda of the day.
That is intellectual dishonesty.
I dont have to prove Muhammad is false because you can never prove that he is true. How can I prove something to be false which is never proven to be true in first place?
Your Quran barely even mentions him. All the Hadiths and Biographies are written more than 2 centures later. There is no mention of him anywhere until 690s.
Makkah's total population has not reached 45,000 people until end of 19th century and was still at 80,000 in 1920s. No mention of Makkah on any ancient maps.
The only thing we know about him is that he existed. All other details are disputed. Where was he from? where he lived? what religion he belong to? what did he preach? All of this is disputed.
Yeah I have to remember which type of Islam you follow because these days there are as many versions of Islam as there are Muslims, its by far the most confused religion in the world.
All the Hadiths and Prophets Biographies and History books are from time of Abbasids and Abbasids are known liars. The problem is that all the complete Qurans are also from Abbasids times, the same Abbasids that are known liars and lied about Hadiths and Prophets Biography.
The oldest complete Quran we have today are the Samarkan Quran and the Topkapi manuscript both of them are from Abbasid period. One of them could be from Ummayad period. None of these match with the partial manuscripts found from time of Muhammad or Uthman.
No mention of Islam or Muslims have been found anywhere including Quran before 690s. Even the rock inscriptions do not talk about Muhammad or Islam. Muawiyas coins do not mention Muhammad and have a Byzantine cross on them meaning he was a Christian.
The word Caliph was not introduced at that time and we can find no evidence for existance of Umar, Usman, Abu Bakr or Ali. We just know that Muhammad existed but we dont know who he was or where he was from or what was he preachign and what was his religion.
Watch this series on Early History of Islam by Ghalib and let me know what you think.
Taalib-e-Haq
Voter (50+ posts)
Au contraire! it is absolutely about what you believe. You believe you know what the Muslims believe. Do you know what belief means? Do you even know what it means to believe, heck do you even know what wanting to believe is?
My brother, very humbly, ultimately you know in your heart the Quran is the ultimate truth and you want to believe, but you are scared of the other side, the side that submits to the Will of God knowingly and wantingly.
I sincerely wish for you to taste the state of being full of Imaan, being truly free of wants and hedonistic desires, self degrading behaviors, living and sacrificing for others and living for something far greater than your meager self.
You are on the path of discovery. May Allah guide you to His Will. :)
Wake up Pak
(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم
I, and there are literally millions of people who do not follow the traditionalist Islam of our present day mullahs, mufti or sheikh. I do not belong to any sect, To me, just the Quran is enough, rest is all man made stuff.
Sectarianism has nothing to do with Islam.
I pity you and all the other intelligent people in the 21st century who are lost in this video game and cannot see the world outside it.
A book that is full of contradictions and says nothing but repeating ancient superstitious myths and scientific mistakes.
Intitutionalizes slavery and subserviance of women
Infinite punishments for finite crimes, every other page threatens of burning with hell fire and other emotional blackmailing
Its an insult to human intelligence to say that this book is written by creator of 200 billion galaxies.
Everyone is lost in selling their own superstitions, Hindus in their bakhti, Muslims in this dirty
Ill leave you with this verse to ponder over where Quran explains how universe was formed:
Quran 11:7
He is the One who created the heavens and the earth in six days, while His throne was on water, so that He might test you as to who among you is better in deed. And if you say, “You shall be raised after death,” the disbelievers will surely say, “This is nothing but sheer magic.”
Where did water come from before universe was formed and what is Allah doing floating on wateR?
Quran 37:6-10
Verily, We have decorated the nearest sky with an adornment, the stars,
and (have made them) a security against every rebellious devil.
They cannot listen to the Upper Realm and are hit from every side
to be driven off, and for them there is a lasting punishment;
This verse is saying shooting stars are missiles that Allah fires at devils. What is this nonsense?
Context from Sahih Muslim:
'Abdullah. Ibn 'Abbas reported: A person from the Ansar who was amongst the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) reported to me: As we were sitting during the night with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), a meteor shot gave a dazzling light. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: What did you say in the pre-Islamic days when there was such a shot (of meteor)? They said: Allah and His Messenger know best (the actual position), but we, however used to say that that very night a great man had been born and a great man had died, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: (These meteors) are shot neither at the death of anyone nor on the birth of anyone. Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, issues Command when He decides to do a thing. Then (the Angels) supporting the Throne sing His glory, then sing the dwellers of heaven who are near to them until this glory of God reaches them who are in the heaven of this world. Then those who are near the supporters of the Throne ask these supporters of the Throne: What your Lord has said? And they accordingly inform them what He says. Then the dwellers of heaven seek information from them until this information reaches the heaven of the world. In this process of transmission (the jinn snatches) what he manages to overhear and he carries it to his friends. And when the Angels see the jinn they attack them with meteors. If they narrate only which they manage to snatch that is correct but they alloy it with lies and make additions to it.
(Muslim, Book 26 : Hadith 5538 )
What is this superstitious nonsense???
Citizen X
(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم
Sheesh, the same ole' rhetoric, like I said none of this matters what fulan did or what fulan didn't do, what word was mentioned by who and what word wasn't mentioned.
I wouldn't even call this grasping at straws because even with that you could end up with a piece of straw in your hand but you have nothing in yours right now. You're just flinging shit at the wall hoping some of it sticks.
Once again at best you have some historical inaccuracies which are meaning less. Unfortunately for you, Islam isn't based or depends on history. You could burn and delete every Islamic historical record from existence and it wouldn't make an iota of a difference to Islam.
More and more it seems your issue is with History and dogma and without these crutches your entire argument falls flat on its face. Maybe you should take it up with the Shia, their entire belief system is based around political history and based on their hadith and historical records. To them these things are of the utmost importance.
Btw still waiting ?
So you are a Quranist? How much percentage of Pakistanis do you think are Quranist? You do know that your opinion is in the extreme minority?
No it wouldnt. Because your belief is not based on evidence, its based on faith. Unfortunately Faith is not a good reason to believe in something.
Its not a matter of historical inaccuracies.
Evidence shows that Islam is a creation of Abbasids.
The same Abbasids that lied about hadiths and everything else.
It puts you in a tough position on one hand to believe in the religion they created and reject the other things they said which you dislike.
If you think I am wrong, find me any reference to Islam before 690 and any reference to Muhammad before Abbasid period. Take a few days if you want to and Ill wait for your response.
