Things in Islam I am curious about...

[Socrates]

How is it that the Muslims were one of the first civilisations to classify music as a mathematical science? (Safi al-Din -1294, al-Mawsili -d.850). Perhaps one of the most outstanding contributions was the development of mensural music, introduced to Europe in the twelfth century, before which measured song was unknown to the West. The concept of gloss -adornment of a melody, was known as tarkib to the Muslims...this is what gave Europe the idea of harmony. Also, the Muslims introduced fiet -farida, notes fixed on the finger board. European minstrals only had cithara and harps and were guided by their ears in tuning. Even the music syllables that make up the basic scale in music today do, re, mi, fa, sol, la and ti comes from the Arabic alphabet Dal-Ra-Mim-Fa-Sad-Lam-Sin.

The Muslims opened the first ever psychiatric hospitals that later spread to Europe during the Crusades. Muslim hospitals excelled in patient care. When most European cities were mud streets and hovels; hospitals in Baghdad, Cairo, and Cordova played music to cure and soothe their patients.

There is no denying the fact that melody and 'song' (without the accompaniment of musical instruments) is intrinsically part of Islam. How many times-a-day do we hear the muezzin from a minaret calling the devout to worship? How does the Imam recite the prayers? How is the Qur'an recited? (Tajweed). The Prophet [PBUH] said; "Embellish the Qur'an with your beautiful voices."

Is the Qur'an not an inimitable Arabic symphony?

There are ofcourse limits to listening to music in just the same way as there are limits to worship. How can one not be moved, for example, by the sight of the sun rising or setting with all the clear majestic signs that are carried with it? The same can be said for all other natural creation and cosmic phenomena with its grandeur and splendour. But we do not worship the sun nor the moon ... this is a form of polytheistic deviation. But their contemplation can encourage deeper conemplation -only extreme familiarity, (and obsession), can become a hinderance, such as idol worship as llustrated in the context of Yvonne Ridley's article that criticised Sami Yusuf's over-enthusiastic female fans.

However, it is no surprise to learn that the influence of and inspiration from Muslim poets of Persia has gained many admirers in the west and is reflected in the music, lyrics, poetry and writings of Madonna(!) Goldie Hawn, Donna Karan, Philip Glass, Deepak Chopra, Coleman Barks, (1999). These influences, nevertheless, do not determine how mediocre or even deviant and occultic the original message was intended ... a subject Muslims have recently become more than obsessed with -subliminal backtracking, satanic messages etc. Such an illustration simply cannot be subjected to such a rudimentary and superficial measurement and equation, especially when the original intention, (metaphysical poetry, lyrics, certain musical instruments etc), was purposed for expanding contemplation by sincere and highly motivated individuals seeking to grasp the beauty of creation.

The blame lies with interpretation. The same can be said against those regimes who interpret verses of the Qur'an and Hadith with a strict and literal no-nuance approach who make provision for only superficial meanings; the Taliban for example.

Finally, without further proseletyzing and hadith-finding arguments and debate, which seem to bring one closer to an enhanced cold fact-finding state; the following verses of the Qur'an [Trans. Abdullah Yusuf Ali] should sum up what is Halal and Haram...

Say: Who hath forbidden the beautiful (gifts) of Allah, which He hath produced for His servants, and the things, clean and pure, (which He hath provided) for sustenance? Say: They are, in the life of this world, for those who believe, (and) purely for them on the Day of Judgment. Thus do We explain the signs in detail for those who understand. 7.32

Say: the things that my Lord hath indeed forbidden are: shameful deeds, whether open or secret; sins and trespasses against truth or reason; assigning of partners to Allah, for which He hath given no authority; and saying things about Allah of which ye have no knowledge. 7.33

...And Allah Almighty knows best

 

[SixTen]

Socrates, you from TSR?

 

[Grace Seeker]

Except that Aisha had not passed puberty.

Let's not get sidetracked. I'll stipulate that there are plenty of cultures where children can be pledged to be married to each other at birth, and it becomes a legal contract and hence a legal marriage at that point. And I'll stipulate that Muhammad's relationship with Aisha was not outside of the norms of their society at the time. Those might be issues regarding whether or not we see Muhammad practicing righteous behavior, but I never questioned that.

The issue I was discussing was the frequent creating of strawmen to critique the Christian faith, by mischaracterizing either the scriptures themselves or Christian theology developed from them.

For instance, saying that the Scriptures never use the term Trinity is a specious argument that has no bearing on the veracity of the concept. And saying that Allah has no partners is also not germane to the Christian concept in which, according to what Christians themselves actually mean when discussing the Trinity in which God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are three persons yet just one God, there are no partners for there still is but one god. So, why do people mis-state the Christian view rather before attacking something that we ourselves don't believe?

 

[MustafaMc]

And I also agree with the statement that there is but one God.

Yes, the quotes I provided from the OT, NT and Qur'an all point to the same One God.

I'll even go so far as to say that I think that Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all attempt to worship the very same God who we might collectively call the God of Abraham.

So, do you attempt to worship the God Who glorified His servant, Jesus?

We may each claim to worship the One God, but the pictures we paint of that God are radically different. Arguing over which is true seems to be a waste of time

I don't see that the concept of Jehovah in the OT is that different from Allah in the Qur'an, certainly not radically so. Is it a waste of time to establish the Truth and to dispel falsehood? For myself I feel a responsibility to do so.

To critique the Christian faith one must first acurately portray the Christian faith.

This is correct, yet when we point out that saying Jesus was the Son of God is ascribing partners to the One God from our Muslim perspective, it does no good for a Christian to counter that it is not shirk because Jesus was the One God in the flesh. This is something that we can't conceive of possibly being true.

Now, I have been asked why do I continually seek clarification and feedback to ascertain if I have understood an answer correctly. It is because if I critique Islam, I want to be sure it is actually Islam I am critiquing.

It is good to have a correct understanding before critiquing.

Why do Muslims who don't even accept the Bible as true, continue to use the Bible to attempt to authenticate the Qur'an?

I have no need to authenticate the Qur'an by using the Bible. The Bible has traces of what could be true. Since Christians reject the Qur'an out of hand, I use the Bible as a tool to try to convey my understanding of the Truth to them.

Why do Muslims that read the Bible insist on doubting its veracity despite the plethora of extant ancient copies and cooberating manuscripts from the first couple of centuries of the Christians era, yet seem to have no problem accepting a book like the supposed Gospel of Barnabas which can't be traced back any further than the 1300s?

I accept the Bible for what it is, a collection of books written by men of which the gospels may contain remnants of the Message that was revealed to Prophet Jesus (as). The Gospel of Barnabas may or may not be a more accurate rendition of the life and sayings of Jesus, but it is undoubtably more comprehensive and more consistent with the OT and the Qur'an.

And why would a person misquote or misinterpret the Bible and then assert that based on such a falsified passage they can show that the God of Christianity is flawed? Duh, of course a god portrayed by a flawed understanding of the scriptures is going to be a flawed god, nothing insightful about that.

We interpret the Bible in light of the Qur'an. What is painfully obvious to us is completely obscure to you. The question is: whose understanding is flawed?

And why do I find these patterns repeated over and over and over again on this board?

Because we can't accept that Jesus (as) was God in the flesh and you can't accept that he was only a Messenger and Servant of Allah.

 

[Muslim Knight]

Culture varies from time to time, and the thing about Western liberalists is that they like to impose their own rules and understanding upon others.

The Prophet marriage to Aisha even though she was of younger age was accepted by the people and the culture of that time, no one has ever recorded a protest to such event, not even from Aisha or Abu Bakr who is her father and legal guardian. Not even the most spiteful opponent of the Prophet registered their disapproval. Why should we impose our today standards against a man who has lived and died 1,400 years ago? Who are we to do just that?

In addition to that, age 9 as recorded by the Tradition might differ from the understanding of Orientalists. The Muslim calendar even varies from the Gregorian calendar. So how can you judge the Prophet based on the fact that he married a juvenile, when you can't even be sure of the fact that entire Muslim historical dates might differ from Gregorian dates?

Learn to understand and accept other people's culture and understanding might be different from ours. A thumbs-up might be an okay-sign in the US, but a crude even offensive gesture in the Japan, almost similar to the middle finger. Who is the American to judge the Japanese on the standards of the Americans?

 

[crayon]

This thread is all about Aisha's marriage:
http://www.islamicboard.com/refutations/5337-marriage-aisha-prophet-pbuh.html

So that we don't repeat everything already in it, perhaps you guys could read it and then ask any remaining questions you still have?

As for girls reaching puberty at the age of 9, I personally know several people that have reached puberty and their menses at age 9 and 10.

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings and ,

I have deleted many posts as I don't think this is an appropriate place to delve into refutations, as we have a whole section dedicated for this purpose, not to mention many threads that have already addressed the specific topic at hand.

Furthermore, it was evident that the discussion was deteriorating. When making mention of Islamic evidence such as hadeeth, it is important to remember the richness of Islamic sciences and that mere quoting and personal interpretation serves little in the way of doing justice. For this reason, it would be better to consult Islamic scholars who can offer guidance based upon proper study and research.

 

[Grace Seeker]

As related to human culture, to what degree are Muslims free to conform to the practices of the culture and times in which they live, and to what degree are they more bound by the standard of being called to live as righteous individuals before God?


is it possible that God's actual standard might very with human culture over time so that what was permissable in the 7th century would not be today or vice versa?

If God's standard does not change, then why would permissiable practices from that era not still be permitted today? Example: the consumation of a marriage between an adult and a child (not necessarily referring to Aisha and Muhammad since it has been repeated reported that this was common and accepted practice I assume there were many such adult/child unions)?

And also, if God's standard does not change, then why would one today permit things today that were not practiced then? Example: the taking of the lives of innocents (many of whom are Muslims themselves) not engaged in any sort of fighting against anyone (let alone Islam), but who were simply attempting to go peaceably about their day -- here I am thinking of what is euphemistically called "suicide" bombing and which I term "homicide" bombings.

 

[aamirsaab]

As related to human culture, to what degree are Muslims free to conform to the practices of the culture and times in which they live, and to what degree are they more bound by the standard of being called to live as righteous individuals before God?


is it possible that God's actual standard might very with human culture over time so that what was permissable in the 7th century would not be today or vice versa?

If God's standard does not change, then why would permissiable practices from that era not still be permitted today? Example: the consumation of a marriage between an adult and a child (not necessarily referring to Aisha and Muhammad since it has been repeated reported that this was common and accepted practice I assume there were many such adult/child unions)?

And also, if God's standard does not change, then why would one today permit things today that were not practiced then? Example: the taking of the lives of innocents (many of whom are Muslims themselves) not engaged in any sort of fighting against anyone (let alone Islam), but who were simply attempting to go peaceably about their day -- here I am thinking of what is euphemistically called "suicide" bombing and which I term "homicide" bombings.

It really depends on the action being performed. So you'd have to give an example (i.e get into the specifics) and then we can go from there.

 

[Grace Seeker]

It really depends on the action being performed. So you'd have to give an example (i.e get into the specifics) and then we can go from there.

You don't think the examples I gave are specific enough?

 

[aamirsaab]

You don't think the examples I gave are specific enough?

I can roll with those you gave. Are there any others tho?

numero uno:

Example: the consumation of a marriage between an adult and a child (not necessarily referring to Aisha and Muhammad since it has been repeated reported that this was common and accepted practice I assume there were many such adult/child unions)?

This is an action of the Prophet rather than action sanctioned by Allah (via the Quran). There's no verse in the Quran that states a specific age of marriage (as in: marry them when they're XY age or something)

Numero dos.

Example: the taking of the lives of innocents (many of whom are Muslims themselves) not engaged in any sort of fighting against anyone (let alone Islam), but who were simply attempting to go peaceably about their day -- here I am thinking of what is euphemistically called "suicide" bombing and which I term "homicide" bombings.

Killings of any innocent is considered a great sin according to the Quran (there's an ayat saying something along the lines of: whosoever killeth a man is as if they have killed mankind; whoseoever has saved a man it is as if he has saved mankind). Suicide is also considered a great sin.

If you are referring to some specific killings during the time of the Prophet, it might be better to actually state those as most if not all rely on context.

 

[Grace Seeker]

I can roll with those you gave. Are there any others tho?

numero uno:


This is an action of the Prophet rather than action sanctioned by Allah (via the Quran). There's no verse in the Quran that states a specific age of marriage (as in: marry them when they're XY age or something)

So, would it then be permissible in Islam under Sharia law for a man of 54 years to marry a girl of 9 years of age today?

Numero dos.


Killings of any innocent is considered a great sin according to the Quran (there's an ayat saying something along the lines of: whosoever killeth a man is as if they have killed mankind; whoseoever has saved a man it is as if he has saved mankind). Suicide is also considered a great sin.

So, if I understand you correctly, it would be a great sin to strap a bomb around your waist, walk into a market in downtown Bagdad surrounded by people who were peacably going about their own business and blow yourself up. Then why do so many Muslims look on these acts favorably?

 

[AntiKarateKid]

So, would it then be permissible in Islam under Sharia law for a man of 54 years to marry a girl of 9 years of age today?





So, if I understand you correctly, it would be a great sin to strap a bomb around your waist, walk into a market in downtown Bagdad surrounded by people who were peacably going about their own business and blow yourself up. Then why do so many Muslims look on these acts favorably?

Cmon man. Are you serious? Why do so many Christians look upon the invasion of Iraq and the killing of thousands of Muslims favorably? The questions can ALWAYS be turned upon you. Why did people look upon the Crusades favorably? Because they were told distorted versions of the Bible/Quran. You think the people who look upon it favorably are any different than when Christians think they were doing good when they wiped out the Native Americans?



I am not an expert on Sharia but I will say this. Many scholars point out that Joseph was 30 years older than Mary

 

[Imam]

it has been repeated reported that this was common and accepted practice I assume there were many such adult/child unions)?

Exactly.....all over the worl


Ancient Egypt


The earliest known ages for brides are quoted by Pestman from Roman Period documents that speak of marriage at 8, 9 and 10. And the label of one late mummy states, in a demotic hand, that the body was of a married girl who had died at the age of 11.



The scribe Qenherkhepeshef of Deir el-Medina, for example, married the 11-year-old girl Nanakht when he was 54.(Ancient Egypt history,ch,3.p.127,by A.Hassan)



Erich Luddeckens, an outstanding student of Egyptian marriage contracts, found from analysis of Ptolemaic contracts that most of the brides were aged 12 or 13. Reconstruction of the biographies of the Amarna princesses has produced the same figure.


India


In India during the 1860’s, marriage meant girls getting married below 8 or 9 years old.


Roman


Roman fathers usually began seeking husbands for their daughters when they reached an age between twelve and fourteen



The renowned sexologists, R.E.L. Masters and Allan Edwards, in their study of Afro-Asian sexual expression states the following

Today, in many parts of North Africa, Arabia, and India, girls are wedded and bedded between the ages of five and nine; and no self-respecting female remains unmarried beyond the age of puberty.6

would it then be permissible in Islam under Sharia law for a man of 54 years to marry a girl of 9 years of age today?

“Judeo-Christian”


Sanhedrin 76b clearly states that it is preferable that a woman be married when she has her first menses,less than 12 years old

However, a father was allowed to betroth his daughter to another man at an earlier age, and sexual intercourse was regarded as a valid means of sealing a betrothal. The age limit for betrothal through sexual intercourse was shockingly low. According to the Talmud, “A girl of the age of three years and one day may be betrothed by intercourse.”42

This age limit was apparently chosen because, according to Rabbinical discussion, the features of virginity in the young female (the hymen, which breaks and bleeds the first time after intercourse) did not finish developing until the age of three years and one day. Intercourse with a female younger than this was like “putting a finger in the eye,”43 that is, as putting a finger in the eye causes it to tear and tear again, intercourse with a female younger than three causes the hymen to initially bleed but then to grow back again, restoring the sign of virginity. Thus intercourse with a female younger than three years and one day was not a crime; it was simply invalid as a means of sealing betrothal by ending her virgin status, since the signs of virginity would eventually reappear. According to the Talmud, “When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when a girl is less than [three years], it is as if one puts the finger into the eye.”(Jonathan Rowe -The Bible and Underaged Sex)



Mary (The mother of god) and Joseph:



The Infancy Gospel of James, Chapter 8 verse 2 to Chapter 9 verse 11

“Mary, then twelve years of age, Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, went up to Jerusalem among the candidates; a miracle manifested the choice God had made of Joseph …and he took her into his own possession.”” ”

if God's standard does not change, then why would one today permit things today that were not practiced then"? Example: the taking of the lives of innocents (many of whom are Muslims themselves) not engaged in any sort of fighting against anyone (let alone Islam), but who were simply attempting to go peaceably about their day ......

In the case of the Bible,I wish that God change his biblical standard in the taking of the lives of innocents

1 Samuel 15
Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy [a] everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.' "

DT 2:33-34 The Israelites utterly destroy the men, women, and children of Sihon.


DT 20:16 "In the cities of the nations the Lord is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes."

JS 6:21-27 With the Lord's approval, Joshua destroys the city of Jericho men, women, and children with the edge of the sword.

JG 21:10-12 "... Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword and; also the women and little ones...

2SA 12:1, 19 The Lord strikes David's child dead for the sin that David has committed.

IS 13:15 "Everyone who is captured will be thrust through; all who are caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their ... wives will be ravished."




Compare that with:


کان رسول الله ـ صلی الله علیه و آله و سلم ـ اذا بعث سریةً دعا بأمیرها فأجلسه الی جنبه و أجلس أصحابه بین یدیه، ثمّ قال: سیروا بسم الله و بالله و فی سبیل الله و علی ملة رسول الله ـ صلی الله علیه و آله ـ لاتغدروا و لاتغلوا و لاتمثلوا و لا تقطعوا شجرة الا أن تضطروا الیها، و لاتقتلوا شیخا فانیا و لا صبیّا و لا إمرأ


in English


The Hadith:

The prophet Mohamed peace be upon him advised (during war don't cut a tree without a must,don't kill old men or women or little one,don't deform a corpse)

 

[Amadeus85]

Reaching puberty is one thing, but the little girl's psychics is other thing. Physicly such young girl can be sometimes ready to have sexual act with man, but I doubt that her mind and psychics would be ready for this.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Cmon man. Are you serious?

Yes, I am serious. Do you have an answer?

 

[Grace Seeker]

Exactly.....all over the worl

Is that a YES, such a marriage would be acceptable?

کان رسول الله ـ صلی الله علیه و آله و سلم ـ اذا بعث سریةً دعا بأمیرها فأجلسه الی جنبه و أجلس أصحابه بین یدیه، ثمّ قال: سیروا بسم الله و بالله و فی سبیل الله و علی ملة رسول الله ـ صلی الله علیه و آله ـ لاتغدروا و لاتغلوا و لاتمثلوا و لا تقطعوا شجرة الا أن تضطروا الیها، و لاتقتلوا شیخا فانیا و لا صبیّا و لا إمرأ


in English


The Hadith:

The prophet Mohamed peace be upon him advised (during war don't cut a tree without a must,don't kill old men or women or little one,don't deform a corpse)

And another YES, the actions of those who commit suicide bombings are in fact great sins?

 

[YusufNoor]

And I also agree with the statement that there is but one God. I'll even go so far as to say that I think that Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all attempt to worship the very same God who we might collectively call the God of Abraham.

But I have to stop there. Brother Muhajid's statemenet was made in response to my comment:

Whether you accept that there is misquoting and misinterpretation going on or not, clearly the attributes that these three religions present of God are not the same. We may each claim to worship the One God, but the pictures we paint of that God are radically different. Arguing over which is true seems to be a waste of time, we each think our own view is correct and for me to quote the Bible at a Muslim to prove my point or for a Muslim to quote the Quran at me to make his/her point seems about like a child claiming my daddy is better than your daddy. Of course we each think that ours is the best, but making those claims proves nothing to no one.

Please keep in mind that you are a PROFESSIONAL PREACHER, you ARE NOT dealing with Muslims that have the same amount of time to researching and answering questions as you do and as such you WILL see answers repeated, different answers to the same questions and yes, maybe even incorrect information. there is also quite a possibility that some, without malicious intent, will find your beliefs and positions incredulous or even ridiculous and post in a matter maybe not the most appropriate. please keep in mind that rather that having your discussions with scholars, you CHOOSE to post here. that brings the possibility that the responses may not be on par with your "scholarship."

Much better I think to try to understand where the other is coming from. And it is for this reason that I said what I said about the misquoting (or at least the misinterpretations) of scripture.

For instance: In another thread a Muslim has been trying to make the case to me that the God of the Bible is a lesser god than Allah because the god of the Bible has to rest. And then he cites the story of creation in Genesis where, in the English translation he cited, God rests on the seventh day. In this case he isn't misquoting, but he is not properly understanding that passage either if he thinks it is really about God needing to rest as in taking a nap. The need to rest is NOT an attribute of the God of the Bible any more than it is of Allah. That view comes from a complete misunderstanding of what the text was actually saying. But rather than simply accept correction on that he wanted to argue with me that he knew what the word "rest" meant, is if that had anything to do with understanding a passage that had been translated out of another language into English.

actually, this IS the position that many scholars in Islam take. IF you don't appreciate our members trying to relate this position to you, please remember that is IS an Islamic opinion on a fault with Jewish/Christians beliefs. you ask they answer, you object, they continue. an idea might be to quote "that God made Sabbath for man..."



Likewise, many Muslims think that Christians ascribe partners to God or have multiplicity of gods, yet again that does not reflect the Christian understanding of our beliefs. Such statements are in fact just the creation of strawmen. They do nothing to compare the Christian understanding of God with the Muslim understanding of Allah when they in fact do not correct represent the Christian understanding of God to begin with. A Muslim can say that Christians believe so and so all they want, but saying it does not make it true, and quoting the Qur'an against something the Christians do not believe doesn't make it more true. To critique the Christian faith one must first acurately portray the Christian faith.

i disagree, we are NOT on an open board or on a Christian board. this board operates on the basis of Islamic opinion. the burden is NOT on us to conform to your opinions, if you wish to change OUR opinions, the burden is on you to do that. we are under NO OBLIGATION WHATSOEVER to "see thing you way!"

Now, I have been asked why do I continually seek clarification and feedback to ascertain if I have understood an answer correctly. It is because if I critique Islam, I want to be sure it is actually Islam I am critiquing. I have no desire to critique some distorted view of Islam that no Muslims actually believe.

Muslims may believe many different things about the same issue and some or all of those positions may fall short of being accurate, if you want Fatwahs, go to a scholar.


Yet, it seems that many Muslims do in fact like to get out their cut and paste machines finding some lecture that purports to destory the Christian faith with a 101 questions of the Bible or a treatise on why so many versions, as if they have found something really damaging.

you come here, so you should expect something along those lines.

In reality they are attacking strawmen as surely as if I was to attack Islam on the grounds that Jihad is all about flying airplanes into buildings

you come and complain about strawmen, and then "stomp your feet" and post your own...
i'm not aware on a single Muslim who has been found guilty of such things, i have only seen the fairy tale put to the public by the Bush administration or those by Zelikow's 911 Commission, they have ALL been proven either false not based in fact. "google" David Ray Griffin and watch his lectures...

or that Muhammad slept with a 9 year old girl

you KNOW that you are trying to be inflammatory, for whatever reasons that you justify to yourself. you WILL have to answer for your tactics on Qiyama.

I've proved him a false prophet.

again, sheeeesh...

Of course ignorant people of all backgrounds will continue to pursue such red herrings and ad hominum arguments, but why would others who are not so ignorant?

we have young members, we have enthusiastic members, is it the "Christian" way to call them ignorant?

Why do Muslims who don't even accept the Bible as true, continue to use the Bible to attempt to authenticate the Qur'an?

you seem to forget our postion...

Why do Muslims that read the Bible insist on doubting its veracity despite the plethora of extant ancient copies and cooberating manuscripts from the first couple of centuries of the Christians era, yet seem to have no problem accepting a book like the supposed Gospel of Barnabas which can't be traced back any further than the 1300s?

OK, i tend to agree with you on this one, BUT this is what some our members here are taught!

And why would a person misquote or misinterpret the Bible and then assert that based on such a falsified passage they can show that the God of Christianity is flawed? Duh, of course a god portrayed by a flawed understanding of the scriptures is going to be a flawed god, nothing insightful about that.

you CAN"T hold to the position that people with real jobs and lives are to be able to comprehend all that you do about your faith...

And why do I find these patterns repeated over and over and over again on this board?

why don't you try some research outside of this board. i recommend that you spend a few hours with Dr Bilal Philips. on this page here:

http://www.bilalphilips.com/bilal_pages.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=288

at the bottom of the page you will see links for video that you can stream for "Foundations of Islamic Studies". i've watched it and i'm sure will find the proper Islamic perspective on many, many issues. when you finished with that, then try "Contemporary Issues", it was done as a dawah tool, but in order for that to be so, he, had to explain the proper Islamic perspective on these issues.

be aware, however if the issue of the Bible does come up, you may see arguements that you aren't thrilled with.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Thank-you, I appreciate the link to the scholars.


Look, you are right about the difference between scholars and those who are not, I wince at some of the things I hear Christians say. (Some of them said by Christians on this board as well.) For that reason, I also try to correct those that are open to listening if I find them to be in grevious error, and basically dismiss the rest. But truly, I don't think it is as much of an issue of scholarship as you suggest. It seems to be more one of the art of logical argument versus emotional bluster and posturing. I'm amazed at the number of Christians I know who say things like, "The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it." When in reality it settles nothing but in their own mind. Having someone say, "The Qur'an says it, I believe it, that settles it." isn't any more likely to settle it, either.

Of course, it is good to have things settled in one's own mind. I certainly have some things settled in mine. But when in conversation with another, there must also be a meeting of minds somewhere or we just have people talking to themselves. And what is the point of that?


My point about critiquing Christians is this. If a Muslims decides that the Bible says the moon is made out of green cheese, because a verse in the Qur'an says "do not be like the people of the book who commit shirk by saying that the moon is made out of green cheese", that statement would not in fact mean that Christians really believe the moon to be made out of green cheese. If you want to find out whether Christians believe the moon to be made out of green cheese the best way to ascertain that would not be to ask the Qur'an what Christians believe, but to ask Christians what Christians believe. You might find out that we don't think the moon is made out of green cheese at all, but yellow cheese covered with green mold. It might be that Muslims would also think this belief to be shirk as well, but it would need to shirk in its own right, not because we believed the shirk idea of the moon being made out of green cheese, for in fact we believe otherwise.

 

[YusufNoor]

My point about critiquing Christians is this. If a Muslims decides that the Bible says the moon is made out of green cheese, because a verse in the Qur'an says "do not be like the people of the book who commit shirk by saying that the moon is made out of green cheese", that statement would not in fact mean that Christians really believe the moon to be made out of green cheese. If you want to find out whether Christians believe the moon to be made out of green cheese the best way to ascertain that would not be to ask the Qur'an what Christians believe, but to ask Christians what Christians believe. You might find out that we don't think the moon is made out of green cheese at all, but yellow cheese covered with green mold. It might be that Muslims would also think this belief to be shirk as well, but it would need to shirk in its own right, not because we believed the shirk idea of the moon being made out of green cheese, for in fact we believe otherwise.

you DO understand that for a Muslim, IF there were a verse in the Qur'an that says:

"do not be like the people of the book who commit shirk by saying that the moon is made out of green cheese"

that THAT ALONE would be all the evidence that a Muslim needed. we follow 2 things, the Qur'an and the Sunnah. notice that the Qur'an is FIRST!

so IF there were a verse that said that and you came on here to dispute it, then the VAST MAJORITY of people here would at the least think you were misguided and lots would think you were bonkers!

i understand your point about "things fellow Christians say" and i do alot of my own squirming, but that leads me to limit what i do and say here. if i had a dollar for everytime i had to correct something, well then it MIGHT be worth my while!

seriously check out those 2 series of videos in particular. Dr Philips is very good at explaining why a belief is what it is. [but you WILL here the whole "God rested thing." me, i would choose something else, but that's just me. i did hear a Sheiykh reference Freidman's Who Wrote the Bible?!!! but only one...]