Straight Answers to Controversial Questions about Islam

[czgibson]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Greetings, Search,

Thank you for your excellent post. You always make thoughtful contributions to these discussions and I'm very grateful to you. I disagree with some of of what you say, but it's refreshing to hear from someone who is actually able to discuss these issues.

So, for the purposes of the discussion, let's revise the scene

Does this change things in any significant way? You're still comparing a human being to an invisible being with no evidence.

In the case of Islam, the One God is not asking you to believe blindly. This is a misapprehension you seem to have developed, and I don't know if it is because you have not come across this ayat or verse from the Quran:

كِتَابٌ أَنْزَلْنَاهُ إِلَيْكَ مُبَارَكٌ لِيَدَّبَّرُوا آيَاتِهِ وَلِيَتَذَكَّرَ أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ
“It is a Book We have sent down to you, full of blessing, so let people of intelligence ponder (liyaddabbaru) its Signs and take heed” (Quran 38:29).

That's rather a well-known quote from the Qur'an, so yes, I'm familiar with it. It's an assertion, and not evidence of anything supernatural.

Obedience (not though blind obedience) is considerable the highest and most desirable state of being AFTER you have verified (1) the existence of this One God and (2) have given thought and time to contemplating the Revelation which is considered the highest Sign though you may ask for your own signs or whatever you personally require to guide you to make this decision on the existence of the One God, and (3) then submit to the authority of the One God with certitude.

Obedience is the highest state of being? Are you sure? Have you considered moving to North Korea?

The Quran mentions the word “knowledge” in various forms 854 times. Let's compare.

Do you know how many times the verb "believe" is used in the Quran? 537.

Do you know how many times the verb "follow" is used in the Quran? 136.

Also, there are only 25 times in the Quran when God asks us to "obey" the messenger.

Do you know what the most frequently occurring injunction is in the Quran? Some variation of "ponder", "reflect," "learn," "teach," "think," "infer," and "imagine."

Do you know what is the most frequent invitation in the Quran? Some variation of "travel in the earth" and "observe" and "see."

I've seen lists like this before. I'm not sure what purpose you think this serves. The Lord of the Rings mentions the word 'hobbit' 802 times - what should we conclude from this?

The Qur'an can encourage knowledge as much as it likes, but many Islamic scholars will tell you to disregard any knowledge that contradicts the Qur'an, like this or this.

So, hopefully, you now realize that Quran does not blindly asks us to obey.

Of course it does. It makes assertions about a being nobody has ever seen or detected in any measurable way.

That said, what I was taught by an Islamic scholar is that we cannot only balance on the level of mind this knowledge of which we're speaking because the belief in the One God requires both our minds and hearts to work together in synchrony. Iman (faith) is said to either exist or not exist in the qalb (heart), not the mind, because qalb is ultimately that which rejects or accepts ultimately the unseen.

The heart pumps blood. It has nothing to do with belief or the supernatural.

I am sure you know that 7 + 1 = 8. Now, what if I repetitively give you this mathematical sum to solve 7 + 1 = ? You will keep answering 8 because you have 100% certainty or certitude that 7 + 1 = 8.

How though did you get this certitude? To get this certitude, you had to first obtain knowledge of basic count. Then you were given the foundation of arithmetic that probably started with 1 + 1 = 2. After obtaining this knowledge, you exercised your mind and were able to see the interpreted probabilistic assignment. This interpreted probabilistic assignment is really "belief" which turned to certitude as you increased in both knowledge and belief with further advancement in mathematics so that you probably no longer even think about answering the sum with the number 8.

I'm surprised that you have used the example of mathematics here. Mathematics is an idealist axiomatic system of reasoning and measurement that humans have created. We believe 7 + 1 = 8 with certainty not because it represents some fundamental truth about the universe (you can't go out and find a 7 existing anywhere in reality), but simply because it is convenient to do so if we intend to make any sense of mathematics or to use it in any meaningful way. Is this similar to your religious belief?

In both these cases, when "faith" is mentioned here, it is really certitude that is being discussed.

The two things are very different. You have convinced yourself that your faith is certain, but it can't be by definition since faith is reliant on personal belief rather than evidence.

That said, I recognize the truth in Pygoscelis's proposition when he'd said that nobody can make themselves believe what they do not believe.

Yes, as with so many of the things Pygoscelis says, he is absolutely right.

That said, please know Islam recognizes that people will need to search and engage to understand. This early quest for knowledge pushed Muslims to excel once in different fields and the Muslim world witnessed the Islamic Golden Age. The importance of reason cannot be underestimated.

Yes, when the Islamic world was open to other ideas it led the world of ideas. I don't dispute that. Once the Ash'ari school gained traction, though, privileging faith and obedience over reason and investigation, that all came to an end. Do you think this has anything to do with the stultifying ignorance and incuriosity that exists across the Islamic world, as described in this article or this?

That said, I do believe that Muslims today are less willing to engage or be engaged on reasoning because dogma has replaced desire for investment in knowledge or active furtherance of knowledge (read both religious and worldly knowledge).

Here you appear to have conceded my central argument. I'm so glad we agree. There is plenty of evidence in this thread alone to support this.

I well understand the dangers of blind obedience, but I also think Islam doesn't ask for blind obedience because obedience must be informed if the matter is of ihsan (excellence) with either combination of or progressive movement in knowledge, belief, and certitude.

Well, it's nice to have ideals.

Peace

 

[noraina]

Just wanted to suggest that if you're not familiar with Muhammad Asad you should read up some of his work, it's a real eye-opener for both Muslims and non-Muslims.

As has been stated above, the Qur'an encourages us as Muslims to discover and learn for ourselves, and with research and independant thinking we'd be able to see the inherent wisdom in every one of His commands and rules - as humans beings we are imperfect and very limited in reasoning, there is no way we can formulate a perfect way of life for ourselves without falling into disagreement or chaos. It's not a matter of blind faith and obedience, but obeying Allah swt because we understand His wisdom and understand that this way of life is better for us in every respect.

But going back to Muhammad Asad - he often points out how the Muslim world is facing so much cultural and intellectual decay because of the way we have abadoned itjihad (independant reasoning) for taqlid (blindly following rules). Look back to the first five or so centuries after Islam, and I know this is brought up a lot, but Muslim civilization was leading the world in every respect including sciences and art, and completely transformed world history. It's because they understood the importantance of seeking knowledge and reasoning - and not because they felt the Qur'an needed reinterpretation, as it doesn't, but to understand and make use of the human intellect the Qur'an frequently makes reference to in order to understand the creation around them and their place in it.

Now, we've become stagnant and strayed which is why we are no longer progressing as we once did...something Asad was very passionate about.

ETA - I know Asad is very rational in his approach compared to some scholars, but his basic ideas are very sound (seriously everyone should read his book 'The Road to Mecca' *amazing* book looking into contemporary Muslim civilization.)

 

[greenhill]

Thank you for that [MENTION=38090]noraina[/MENTION] .. I especially like to quote you here..

"It's not a matter of blind faith and obedience, but obeying Allah swt because we understand His wisdom and understand that this way of life is better for us in every respect."

Simply put. Could not have said it better. I feel the same way. It is on the road of surrendering to His Will. It is just that the education system teaches us to only trust what we can physically measure. Spirituality is going to be history. Perhaps in future confined to the lunatic section.

But as you also said the inherent wisdom in every one of His (Allah's) commands, rules and for me the grand design and epic scale of it. How time is only important and relevant to us, but not for Allah. How fragments from all around adds up. Like the formation of the foetus, and even our salat motions, my grandmother was supple to a ripe old age. And I notice at masjids, many old people can sit on the floor and get up of their own without aid. They are more flexible than most I have seen in the west who would find it hard to squat for long. There is also health benefits in doing salah.. then, for those healthy, fasting. Even that has physical benefits. And the list is long..

eace:

 

[piXie]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

For example, apparently it's OK for you to use words from the Qur'an to compare people like me to cattle ("worse than cattle", in fact - this seems a bit harsh on the cattle; does the Creator hate cows for some reason?), which some people might be offended by.

Please tell me, which of the two are more offensive; For a group of people (who refuse to use their faculties of reason) to be compared to cattle or for the whole of humanity to be considered animals whose ancestors are apes and monkeys?

No, in this case it's a lack of evidence. And I have studied psychology to Master's level.

The members on this forum have discussed countless evidences which have convinced thousands of people and still convincing thousands of people to this day. As for other people they are waiting for Judgement Day, because nothing else will convince them. What kind of evidence will you accept? To actually see God?

True. In fact, there is exactly the same amount of evidence.

Did the fairies produce a book like the Quran?

Prove me wrong - show me a successful society of this kind.

You should study Islamic history.

Do you mean 'biased'?

Yes, thank you.

Again, sorry you've had your feelings hurt, but I think I have made considerable efforts to learn about Islam.

This is not a personal issue. This is about Our Creator, and this is an Islamic forum. This should be respected. I hope you understand.

Peace.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Please tell me, which of the two are more offensive; For a group of people (who refuse to use their faculties of reason) to be compared to cattle or for the whole of humanity to be considered animals whose ancestors are apes and monkeys?

Would you rather be a vegetable or a mineral? Of course we are animals. That is only insulting if you don't understand what it means. And why be offended by having evolved from common ancestors with other living beings on the planet? Why be so self important? Why not have some humility? The sun doesn't go around the earth either, and the sun is just one of billions of stars in the universe. But don't feel small. Feel at one with the universe, because you are made of the same materials that burst out of stars. We are literally star stuff. How is that not awesome?

The above offends you? Do you think it is more offensive than telling people that you endorse a God that would torture people forever and ever because they simply don't believe he exists, because he himself created them that way? I can think of little more offensive than that. You can duck and dodge and say it isn't you that thinks we should suffer eternally, and that it is God's decree, but in endorsing said God and calling him Good, plenty of theists ARE taking that position.

The members on this forum have discussed countless evidences which have convinced thousands of people and still convincing thousands of people to this day.

Thousand of people believe in homeopathy, scientology, etc. Billions of people were once completely convinced that faeries and ghosts were rampant. There is no evidence for any of this; just as there is no evidence for Gods. Convincing people and having actual evidence are not the same thing.

As for other people they are waiting for Judgement Day, because nothing else will convince them. What kind of evidence will you accept? To actually see God?

That would be something. It would also be a lot more convincing if the religions were set up in ways that didn't look totally man made. Y'know, like being smoothly distributed instead of geographically or family based. Or like not having books written by in ink by humans. Why not some supernatural means of communicating the message? In fact why does God not simply make us all believe he exists and know what he wants of us. Then it would be a fair test for us and we could do that or not do that. You can't really fairly fault people for not following a command that they don't believe in a real command. I bet you don't lose much sleep over not follow the commands of Darth Vader or Voldemort. The mere existence of holy books and of atheists are points against you here.

Did the fairies produce a book like the Quran?

Oh I am sure there are some books out there that people say were written by faeries, or dictated to humans by faeries, just as Mohammed claims regarding an angel.

This is not a personal issue. This is about Our Creator, and this is an Islamic forum. This should be respected. I hope you understand.

Don't ask questions you don't want or can't handle the honest answer to.

 

[piXie]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Why be so self important? Why not have some humility?

Indeed why not have some humility. Why not know our place before our Creator and put our head on the ground and submit to Him. Why be so self important that we expect Him to come to us personally and tell us. And why be so arrogant as to think that we know better than our Creator and argue concerning His legislations.

You are right. Why not have some humility.

 

[Tim_the_Plumber]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Indeed why not have some humility. Why not know our place before our Creator and put our head on the ground and submit to Him. Why be so self important that we expect Him to come to us personally and tell us. And why be so arrogant as to think that we know better than our Creator and argue concerning His legislations.

You are right. Why not have some humility.

Given the vastness of the universe is it not extremely arrogant to think that whatever made it happen would have the slightest awareness of humanity at all let alone any single person?

 

[greenhill]

I think this is out of context... I believe this was raised due to the Quran comparing some people to cattle and that was maybe questioned... hence the explanation and comparison.

To take it just from there is a bit misleading, no?


eace:

 

[Txyib]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Masha Allah , such an amazing philosophical response ! Atheists love philosophy ))

 

[Tim_the_Plumber]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Masha Allah , such an amazing philosophical response ! Atheists love philosophy ))

Yes. Without an old book to tell you what is right you have to think for yourself.

 

[Scimitar]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Yes. Without an old book to tell you what is right you have to think for yourself.

It's that "Old Book" which taught me how to "think for myself"... Tim, I've yet to find another holy book which actually encourages the reader to ask the BIG QUESTIONS, to ponder them, to seek knowledge, to question, to investigate and more. I've not yet found anything like the Qur'an.

You should read it, with commentary by Ibn Kathir or another - you clearly do not know what you are missing out on bro.

Scimi

 

[Txyib]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Yes. Without an old book to tell you what is right you have to think for yourself.

asalam Alaikum
Lets go to the basics of philosophy since you love philosophy , as the brother mentioned before , about it being better to believe in an afterlife than not to believe in one. Let's look at the philosophy of John Hick in his eschatological verification.
Eschatological verification describes a case where a statement can be verifiable if true but not falsifiable if false. The term is most commonly used in relation to God and the afterlife.
John Hick has expressed the premise as an allegory of a quest to a Celestial City. In this parable, a theist and an atheist are both walking down the same road. The theist believes there is a destination, the atheist believes there is not. If they reach the destination, the theist will have been proven right, however if there is no destination on an endless road, this can never be verified. This is an attempt to explain how a theist expects some form of life or existence after death and an atheist does not. They both have separate belief systems and live life accordingly, but logically one is right and the other is not. If the theist is right, he will be proven so when he arrives in the afterlife. However, if the atheist is right, they will simply both be dead and nothing will be verified.

So tell me , which one sounds better to you brother ?

 

[greenhill]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Given the vastness of the universe is it not extremely arrogant to think that whatever made it happen would have the slightest awareness of humanity at all let alone any single person?

That just about sums up the limit of human understanding.

I mean really? That this precious life is insignificant in the overall sceme of things? It may be so. But I believe that the One that made it happen also put the motion in place that has lead to where we are and our moment in that motion is here and now.

All these things set from an earlier plan, very much like planting a tree and nurturing it to fruition. From the soil, the sun, the rain, the pollinators, through to the tree itself, the root, trunk, branches, leaves and the seasonal fruits. All in due time. Like the formation of the universe for man. Because we are special. We can realise that there has to be a Creator for all this. We can seek Him. And be humble and thankful to Him.

Or.

We can choose to be arrogant and deny His Existence and live here on earth ungrateful to His mercy though we know weighing all the odds, even statistically, there has to be that initiating point.

That point was when Allah said, ' "Kun" fayakun.' Or "Be!" And it was. The Big Bang...

And He told the story, taught us what we knew not, through prophets, and most, had a torrid time. Idris pbuh taught us to make clothes. Another prophet Daud(?) made metal armoury and stuff, and I am sure there are other examples, and from there, the knowledge expanded.

And yet the message survives, people, from moment of the first man, Adam pbuh, set foot on earth, until today, there has been a continuous chain of people or groups of people who believe in Allah. As the Quran message is more understood, by more people of intellect, the growth has been phenomenal.

But there will always be detractors. Those who cannot bow down and submit to Allah's command. Like Satan. As he was in the presence of Allah, he got immediate retribution, but was granted a reprieve.

We, on the other hand, don't get to be in that presence, so far out in the universe and set in this earthly body. Hence, our freedom to choose, almost without consequence (if you want to believe it) for a defined period and then it is over.

When you leave this earthly life, that moment is gone. So then, there might be nothing. But then again, there might be questions... then what?

Then what?

Didn't you ponder? Didn't you reason? Didn't you... ?.... and denial.. even Einstein quipped that there must be God. Only he spent his time on theories and not religion.

(On that note, I wonder what he would have thought of the Quran...)

But still, people at large fail to see any relevance about the story of satan's fall from grace to our own relationship with God. Will you submit to His Will?

Will you?

The tempation of the world is like telling a kid to eat a packet of candies slowly. They will finish it almost soon after it's opened. We are like that kid with the packet of candies, with regards to the real world, almost like we will lose out if we don't stuff it down our throat quickly, we just can't accept the advice.

That and (coming back to Satan), we don't like to be ordered. Our pride...

... or our freedom to choose..


eace:

 

[Tim_the_Plumber]

^ That old question.

But it's not really that question that is asked. The cost of agreeing that you might as well believe, or at least not question, the idea of there being an afterlife and it's only availible to you if you .......... is all that .........

You must give lots of power and money to the priest/vicar/Imam. You must kill who he says. You must die to defend this idea you have not thought it worth questioning.

Well, I have the keys to the gates of heaven. All you have to do is send me $1000 and I will send your soul to heaven when you die. I have this power.

Why would you not apply the same reasoning to the above statement as the do you believe in God one? It's a lot cheaper in the long run.

 

[Serinity]

^ That old question.

But it's not really that question that is asked. The cost of agreeing that you might as well believe, or at least not question, the idea of there being an afterlife and it's only availible to you if you .......... is all that .........

You must give lots of power and money to the priest/vicar/Imam. You must kill who he says. You must die to defend this idea you have not thought it worth questioning.

Well, I have the keys to the gates of heaven. All you have to do is send me $1000 and I will send your soul to heaven when you die. I have this power.

Why would you not apply the same reasoning to the above statement as the do you believe in God one? It's a lot cheaper in the long run.

No, cause you have no proof. You are not a Prophet, therefore, whatever you claim of the unseen, is mute. You are lying and you speak from ignorance.

Read the Qur'an, reflect, think and reason, go back read again, reflect.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Yes. Without an old book to tell you what is right you have to think for yourself.

But Tim, thinking for yourself is dangerous! You may have bad thoughts or reach incorrect conclusions! If God is all good and all knowing, isn't it better to stop thinking for yourself, and just do whatever God says? Submit your will, your thoughts and your moral decision making to him. And if anything he tells you to do sounds bad or wrong, don't worry, it can't really be bad or wrong, because he is all good and all knowing, and he knows better than you. So go ahead and do that horrible thing that God is telling you to do! It'll be ok. Its actually a good thing to do and your [-]victims[/-] beneficiaries will be happy for it in the end.

^ About sums it all up, right?

 

[Tim_the_Plumber]

No, cause you have no proof. You are not a Prophet, therefore, whatever you claim of the unseen, is mute. You are lying and you speak from ignorance.

Read the Qur'an, reflect, think and reason, go back read again, reflect.

Correct I am not any more able to do magic than you. I am not devine. You have sucessfully detected a scam.

Why does your book pass the same test which I failed? If I wrote a book or used one already written why could I not make the same claim with the same force? It worked for L. Ron Hubbard. He invented Scientstology.

 

[Serinity]

Correct I am not any more able to do magic than you. I am not devine. You have sucessfully detected a scam.

Why does your book pass the same test which I failed? If I wrote a book or used one already written why could I not make the same claim with the same force? It worked for L. Ron Hubbard. He invented Scientstology.

Cuz, if you wrote a book and said "come here, heaven is here" . I could do the same, proving you wrong. What you must be able to do is do something NONE except someone sent by God, can. Something that is outside physics, the human capacity.

If you make a claim, where is your proof? A book you wrote yourself? Anything that is imitatable, or anything that is comparable to creation, can never be from God.

First you have to know God exists, then you will know how to search for Him. Not the other way around. God can not contradict sound human nature, reason or logic

God said, if The Qur'an was from other than God, you'd find in it much contradiction. God also challenges mankind to write a book like The Qur'an (which is impossible, since it is from God)

 

[czgibson]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Greetings,

It's that "Old Book" which taught me how to "think for myself"... Tim, I've yet to find another holy book which actually encourages the reader to ask the BIG QUESTIONS, to ponder them, to seek knowledge, to question, to investigate and more. I've not yet found anything like the Qur'an.

We keep hearing that the Qur'an encourages the reader to think and ask questions. So can anybody explain what the following passage is about?

"O you who have believed, do not ask about things which, if they are shown to you, will distress you. But if you ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be shown to you. Allah has pardoned that which is past; and Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing. A people asked such [questions] before you; then they became thereby disbelievers." (5:101-102)

You should read it, with commentary by Ibn Kathir or another - you clearly do not know what you are missing out on bro.

It fascinates me that a book with supposedly divine authorship can look so impressive to someone like you and so unimpressive to someone like me. I've read it and I just cannot see any of the qualities that Muslims claim for it.

Peace

 

[Scimitar]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Greetings,

Howdy,

We keep hearing that the Qur'an encourages the reader to think and ask questions. So can anybody explain what the following passage is about?

"O you who have believed, do not ask about things which, if they are shown to you, will distress you. But if you ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be shown to you. Allah has pardoned that which is past; and Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing. A people asked such [questions] before you; then they became thereby disbelievers." (5:101-102)

Sure bro.

People used to ask the Prophet (peace be on him) many questions which were of no practical relevance to either religious or day-to-day affairs. For instance, a person asked the Prophet (peace be on him) in the presence of a crowd: 'Who is my real father?' Likewise, many people used to ask unnecessary questions about legal matters. By these uncalled for inquiries they sought knowledge of matters which had for good reasons, been deliberately left undetermined by the Law-giver.

In the Qur'an, for example - Pilgrimage - had been declared obligatory. A person who became aware of this came to the Prophet (peace be on him) and inquired: 'Has it been made obligatory to perform it every year?' To this the Prophet (peace be on him) made no reply. When he inquired for the second time the Prophet (peace be on him) again stayed silent. On being asked for the third time, he said: 'Pity on you! Had I uttered "Yes" in reply to your question, it would have become obligatory to perform it every year. And then you would not have been able to observe it and would have been guilty of disobedience.' (See Bukhari, 'Riqaq', 22; 'Zakah', 53; I'tisam', 3; 'Adab', 6; Muslim, 'Aqdiyah', 10, 11, 13, 14; Darimi, 'Riqaq', 38; Muwatta', 'Kalam', 20; Ahmad b. Hanbal, Musnad, vol. 2, pp. 327, 360, 367; vol. 4, pp. 246, 249, 250, 251, 255 - Ed.)

The Prophet (peace be on him) discouraged people from being over-inquisitive and unnecessarily curious about every question. We find in the Hadith the following saying from the Prophet (peace be on him): 'The worst criminal among the Muslims is the one who inquired about something which had not been made unlawful, and then it was declared so, because of his inquiry.' (Bukhari, I'tisam', 3; Muslim, Fada'il', 132, 133; Abu Da'ud, 'Sunnah', 6 - Ed.) According to another tradition the Prophet (peace be on him) said: 'God has imposed upon you certain obligations, do not neglect them; He has imposed certain prohibitions, do not violate them; He has imposed certain limits, do not even approach them; and He has remained silent about certain matters - and has not done so out of forgetfulness (rather, it is a mercy unto you) - do not pursue them.' (See Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. I, (Surah 2, n. 110 - Ed.)

In both these traditions an important fact has been called to our attention. In matters where the Law-giver has chosen to lay down certain injunctions only broadly, without any elaborate details, or quantitative specifications, He has done so not because of neglect or forgetfulness. Such seeming omissions are deliberate, and the reason thereof is that He does not desire to place limitations upon people, but prefers to allow them latitude and ease in following His commandments. Now there are some people who make unnecessary inquiries, causing elaborately prescribed, inflexibly determined and restrictive regulations to be added to the Law. Some others, in cases where such details are in no way deducible from the text, resort to analogical reasoning, thereby turning a broad general rule into an elaborate law full of restrictive details, and an unspecified into a specified rule. Both sorts of people do our rendering of context no good. For, in the area of belief, the more detailed the doctrines to which people are required to subscribe, the more problematic it becomes to do so. Likewise, in legal matters, the greater the restriction, the greater the likelihood of violation. When we are asked to "Question, ponder, reflect, reason, investigate" it is to do so with a keen focus on the moral codes as well as intellectual reasoning in mind, and not counter-productive, often hasty thought processes which lead one to circular logic.

قَدۡ سَاَ لَهَا قَوۡمٌ مِّنۡ قَبۡلِكُمۡ ثُمَّ اَصۡبَحُوۡا بِهَا كٰفِرِيۡنَ‏ 
(5:102) Indeed some people before you had asked such questions and in consequence fell into unbelief.

Some people first indulged in hair-splitting arguments about their laws and dogma, and thereby wove a great web of confused elaborations and legal minutiae. Then they became enmeshed in this same web and thus became guilty of dogmatic errors and the violation of their own religious laws. The people referred to here are the Jews and the Christians, and the Muslims who followed in their footsteps and left no stone unturned, despite the warnings contained in the Qur'an and in the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him).

It fascinates me that a book with supposedly divine authorship can look so impressive to someone like you and so unimpressive to someone like me. I've read it and I just cannot see any of the qualities that Muslims claim for it.

It is not to be read like a book - but studied like a science... worked like math... weighed against a philosphers stone and drunk til the waters run black.

Only then, can you claim you have "read it". And remember, without Lanes Lexicon and an Exegesis to hand, you are winking at a girl in the dark - only you know what you are doing, but no one else does.

Peace

And unto you, be the peace.

Scimi