Signs Of Doomsday Day!!!

[bsfmtl123]

You seem to not be able to make the distinction between an Arab and a Muslim. A Muslim has no right to hurt another living being. Some Arabs do not respect these obligations and are, thus, not real Muslims.

As for wife-beating, it is, again, something the Arabs and many Westerners do. They aren't necessarily Muslim. A couple of true believing Muslims would never get to the point of beating. They would simply divorce or come to an agreement.

I don't understand how you classify someone as a real Muslim. What makes your view of a Muslim any more valid than someone else's? I'm sure there are people who wouldn't classify you as being a real Muslim.

It's not that difficult being a real Muslim but in today's world Muslims don't follow their Religion completely.......same goes for many Christians as well.

 

[Pyrmon]

You seem to not be able to make the distinction between an Arab and a Muslim. A Muslim has no right to hurt another living being. Some Arabs do not respect these obligations and are, thus, not real Muslims.

As for wife-beating, it is, again, something the Arabs and many Westerners do. They aren't necessarily Muslim. A couple of true believing Muslims would never get to the point of beating. They would simply divorce or come to an agreement.

I don't understand how you classify someone as a real Muslim. What makes your view of a Muslim any more valid than someone else's? I'm sure there are people who wouldn't classify you as being a real Muslim.

Real Muslims are those who do not follow the Majority. They are the ones who follow the teachings of the Qur'an and live in peacefully, both inward and outward. It is the very meaning and definition of the word Muslim.
My view of a Muslim is supported by the Qur'an. The ones who are wrong are those who would call me an apostate, as they do not follow the real teachings of the Qur'an.

 

[TrolleyDave]

I've been on the fence about converting for a few months now. And I've regarded Islam as the best(least bad) religion for even longer. I guess that explains why you think I was Muslim. Maybe I was a Muslim deep down inside, I don't know. All I know is that I have only officially converted in the last few weeks. And to give the proper point of view of a Muslim, I had to say something about the criticism. No?

Sorry, I just don't believe you. If I was to do a search for your name (real name and user name) would I turn up any results of you talking about Islam as being your religion dating before the beginning of this thread? And what I meant by you refusing to criticise Islam where necessary was just that, nothing to do with you refuting my criticisms. You have refused to criticise the Qu'ran, whereas most people who aren't Muslims who defend the Qu'ran also criticise where criticism is necessary.

Again, Muslims(particularly Arab Muslims) don't always do things they should. And add to the restrictions the verse saying that it is impossible for a man to be just towards several wives. Thus prohibiting Polygamy unless the circumstances call for it.

Nowhere in the Sura does it say "This is only acceptable if...". At best it advises against, at worst it's a tenuous contradiction.

Well, then, lets use only the Qur'an and no Hadith from now on. A least, when replying to me.

I'm afraid that's not possible. Whether you follow them or not or whether you believe they are part of Islam or not is irrelevant. They are a valid source of Islamic history. They also show the true face of Mohammed, who is supposed to be "the example for all mankind". They also show what the true meanings of verses were along with the Tafsir written closer to the time of Mohammed. If you're going to go by the logic that you don't accept them because they were written by mankind a couple of hundred years after the Qu'ran then the same would also hold true of the Qu'ran that you use. The Qu'ran you use was compiled and scribed by Uthman, a couple of hundred years after the death of Mohammed. Before you go on about the whole "God promised to keep it protected" remember that argument holds no weight whatsoever unless you can prove the existence of the Abrahamic god or you can show me a copy of the Qu'ran from pre-Uthman era that looks exactly like the Qu'ran you use today. Otherwise it's not really any different than saying "Santa Clause promised to keep the Qu'ran free from change".

QUOTE

I can't find a verse that promotes slavery for the life of me. Please, just give me the verse. I never justified anyone having slaves. I'm just saying that, at least, slaves are well treated until they are freed. And war prisoners are to be freed, as this link says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_war_in_Islam

Verses in the Qu'ran promoting slavery :

Spoiler

Qu'ran 4:36 - Worship Allah and associate nothing with Him, and to parents do good, and to relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbor, the neighbor farther away, the companion at your side, the traveler, and those whom your right hands possess. Indeed, Allah does not like those who are self-deluding and boastful.

Qu'ran 4:92 - And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased's family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer - then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty - then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] - then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah . And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 23:6 - Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed

Qu'ran 24:31 - And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.

Qu'ran 24:58 - O you who have believed, let those whom your right hands possess and those who have not [yet] reached puberty among you ask permission of you [before entering] at three times: before the dawn prayer and when you put aside your clothing [for rest] at noon and after the night prayer. [These are] three times of privacy for you. There is no blame upon you nor upon them beyond these [periods], for they continually circulate among you - some of you, among others. Thus does Allah make clear to you the verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 33:50 - O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.

Qu'ran 33:55 - There is no blame upon women concerning their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons or their women or those their right hands possess. And fear Allah . Indeed Allah is ever, over all things, Witness.

Regardless of how well those slaves were treated the Qu'ran is a book that is supposed to be the guiding light of morals for all mankind for all time. Why is it even saying that owning another human is acceptable? Owning another human being is unacceptable. Say it with me now "The Qu'ran is wrong for saying owning another human being is acceptable". And why is the Abrahamic god telling Mohammed that it's ok to capture women during war and use them for sexual playthings? Shouldn't a perfect, compassionate and understanding deity be saying the complete opposite? And yes, each time you say "Well they weren't as badly treated" is justifying slavery. You're saying "Well they couldn't have been all bad, at least they treated them ok". When really what you should be saying is "Under no circumstances is owning a human being ok" and ending it there. Any human being with even a grain of compassion of their mindset knows that owning a human being, regardless of circumstance or treatment, is immoral, unjust and inhumane.

Now I have the same challenge in reverse. Show me the sections in the Qu'ran that states that owning another human being is immoral, unjust, inhumane and should never happen in any circumstances whatsoever.

 

[TrolleyDave]

<!--quoteo(post=3716497:date=Jun 15 2011, 10:31 AM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 15 2011, 10:31 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3716497"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You can call it "misleading or play on words" but there are certain circumstances including the consent of the first wife.
Women population much higher than men(one reason),that is why Quran <b>ALLOWS</b>(but does not order) four marriages.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No, that's why it was allowed. There is nothing in the Qu'ran that says "This is the only time this is acceptable". Seeing as how the book claims to be "perfectly clear" then if it was only allowed in those circumstances it would state it. All it does is suggest against it and leave it wide open to interpretation

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not the Prophet but Only Allah has the authority to change any rule in the Quran.Women population in the present century is also higher than men in some places..................Allah created every rule in the Quran for a purpose.....It might be possible that you may not be able to find any reason for it now but later u will be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No, a prophet can change the rules as well as the prophet can state that "God told me to change it". No, the Abrahamic god didn't create every rule in the Qu'ran. Mohammed created every rule in the Qu'ran, he just claimed to be speaking for the Abrahamic god.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Worldly needs and desires have crept in to their daily lives.Out of hundred only 5 or 4 Muslims can be true followers(I am talking about the present century).People have made sects for their own reliability and remember that every Muslim is not a Sunni or a Shia.Muslims are fighting with each other,hostilities,ignorance........If Muslims are not following Islam in true letters spirit then how can anyone judge Islam according to them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And how can you be sure that you are following Islam in it's true spirit? To follow Islam in it's true spirit you must following what Mohammed and his companions taught. Are you following everything that they taught or are you superimposing your own morality code on top of Islam to come up with your own version?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yes but there are some bodily and physical differences between them.For example:Women have big breasts but men don't.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ok, but there aren't many women that would actually want to wander around in public with their tits hanging out. Men are allowed to bare their stomachs (Mohammed himself rode around topless), are women allowed to show their stomachs?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Can you please explain the concept of Abrahamic God?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Abrahamic god is the one you follow.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If God appeares before you.......it means that He existed then don't you think that He would have far more knowledge and power than you do.He is he One Who created a small cell to big planets such as earth which obviously you can't do.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I couldn't give a toss whether he has far more knowledge and power than me, his morals are inferior to mine therefore he is deserving of criticism. For a being that claims he is perfect, compassionate and all-knowing he should really known better than to teach some of the things he taught.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Which evidence?Please do post them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Some evidence that Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran :

Spoiler

Qu'ran 2:108 - "Or do you intend to ask your Messenger as Moses was asked before? And whoever exchanges faith for disbelief has certainly strayed from the soundness of the way." - This is Mohammed declaring that anyone who questions him is an unbeliever, stopping any effective criticism or questioning. It is a tactic used by alot of totalitarian rules. Hitler's was "Anyone who questions the party is a traitor".

Qu'ran 3:118 - "O you who have believed, do not take as intimates those other than yourselves, for they will not spare you [any] ruin. They wish you would have hardship. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater. We have certainly made clear to you the signs, if you will use reason." - This is Mohammed telling Muslims not to associate with non-Muslims. He knew that if he made a mistake in what he was saying then people would be able to find out. However if they listen solely to Mohammed, his companions and that which Islam teaches nobody will ever know any different. Another tactic commonly used in a dictatorship. See China, North Korea, USSR, Nazi Germany and many other totalitarian regimes for examples of this.

Qu'ran 5:101 - "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." - Another example of Mohammed telling people not to ask questions. In other words he was scared they would ask him something that he couldn't answer and make people realise he was making it all up.

Qu'ran 2:106 - "We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?" - This is Mohammed's "Get out of jail" free clause. In other words if he forgets or contradicts something then it wasn't him forgetting, it was God changing it. Only someone who was making it up as he went along would need this.

Qu'ran 5:92 - "And obey Allah and obey the Messenger and beware. And if you turn away - then know that upon Our Messenger is only [the responsibility for] clear notification." - There are lots of verses in the Qu'ran telling people to obey Mohammed, and not doing so is a grievous sin. Why is the Qu'ran telling people to obey Mohammed without question, should it only be God that people obey? And what better way for a ruler to have ultimate control without question from his people. To question a ruler is treasonous, but to question God is blasphemous. The North Koreans use a similar premise for Kim Il Jong.

Qu'ran 33:50 - "O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful." - A rule laid out specifically for Mohammed, one that allows him to have sex with any Muslim woman who wants to give herself to him. There's quite a few examples like this in the Qu'ran that show an incredible amount of favouritism towards Mohammed.

Qu'ran 33:53 - "O you who have believed, do not enter the houses of the Prophet except when you are permitted for a meal, without awaiting its readiness. But when you are invited, then enter; and when you have eaten, disperse without seeking to remain for conversation. Indeed, that [behavior] was troubling the Prophet, and he is shy of [dismissing] you. But Allah is not shy of the truth. And when you ask [his wives] for something, ask them from behind a partition. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts. And it is not [conceivable or lawful] for you to harm the Messenger of Allah or to marry his wives after him, ever. Indeed, that would be in the sight of Allah an enormity." - Another verse telling people not to converse with Mohammed. This verse was also "miraculously" sent down at a time when Mohammed was beginning to become annoyed with people questioning him. The only reason he would not want people questioning him is if he had something to hide and was worried about being caught out. Surely anyone who was speaking for God would have no problems answering all the questions that humanity could throw at him. It's also another rule specifically for Mohammed which declares that no-one may marry his wives after he dies. Was he worried that information might slip pointing towards the fact that he was making it all up as he went along?

Qu'ran 8:41 - "And know that anything you obtain of war booty - then indeed, for Allah is one fifth of it and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and the orphans, the needy, and the [stranded] traveler, if you have believed in Allah and in that which We sent down to Our Servant on the day of criterion - the day when the two armies met. And Allah , over all things, is competent." - Mohammed gets the greater share of war booty. And why would God (a being supposedly beyond our comprehension, free from the trappings of Earthly desires and a being who could create anything he wants) need war booty? In otherwords, the war booty is for Mohammed but it sounds better if it's for God.

Qu'ran 33:30 - "O wives of the Prophet, whoever of you should commit a clear immorality - for her the punishment would be doubled two fold, and ever is that, for Allah , easy." - Mohammeds wives get double punishment for misbehaving.

Qu'ran 16:101 - "And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse - and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down - they say, "You, [O Muhammad], are but an inventor [of lies]." But most of them do not know." - Mohammed gets caught out making it all up so God sends down a verse to back him up. This goes hand in hand with the abrogation verse.

Qu'ran 18:86 - "Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it [as if] setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people. Allah said, "O Dhul-Qarnayn, either you punish [them] or else adopt among them [a way of] goodness."" - The sun does not set in a spring of dark mud nor does it appear like it sets in a spring of dark mud.

Qu'ran 21:33 - "And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all [heavenly bodies] in an orbit are swimming." - The Sun does not swim along in an orbit. However this does hold up with the average thought back then that the Earth was the centre of the universe and that the Sun and the Moon orbited us rather than us orbiting the Sun.

Qu'ran 36:38 - "And the sun runs [on course] toward its stopping point. That is the determination of the Exalted in Might, the Knowing." - The Sun is stationary and does not go towards a stopping place.

Qu'ran 36:40 - "It is not allowable for the sun to reach the moon, nor does the night overtake the day, but each, in an orbit, is swimming." - Evidence that in the above verses it's talking about the Sun orbiting the Earth, and that Mohammed believed that the Sun and the Moon followed the same orbital trajectory.

Qu'ran 23:14 - "Then We made the sperm-drop into a clinging clot, and We made the clot into a lump [of flesh], and We made [from] the lump, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh; then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allah , the best of creators." - This is not how an embryo is formed at all. At no point are we a "clinging clot". Also flesh does not come after bone during the formation of a foetus, it happens all at the same time.

Qu'ran 86:6-7 - "He was created from a fluid, ejected, Emerging from between the backbone and the ribs." - That's not where sperm comes from, it is however where ancient Greek scientists and philosophers thought it came from.

Qu'ran 67:5 - "And We have certainly beautified the nearest heaven with stars and have made [from] them what is thrown at the devils and have prepared for them the punishment of the Blaze." - In reality there's no such thing as "shooting stars", stars are stationary.

Qu'ran 67:19 - "Do they not see the birds above them with wings outspread and [sometimes] folded in? None holds them [aloft] except the Most Merciful. Indeed He is, of all things, Seeing." - There is a scientific reason why birds can fly. It's not God holding them aloft. <a href="http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceSupp/Activities/Flight/Overview/FlyLesson3.htm" target="_blank">http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceS.../FlyLesson3.htm</a>

Qu'ran 2:222 - "They will ask you about menstruation. Say, 'It is harmful, so keep away from women during it. Do not approach them until they are purified of it, when they are purified you may approach them as Allah has ordained." - Menstruation is not harmful, it's perfectly normal and natural. There is a scientific reason for it.

There's more stuff in the Qu'ran itself that I could go on about if you like?
--------------------------------------------------
It gets many things wrong about Christianity. Christians don't worship Jesus and Mary in place of or along with God, and not all Christians follow the teaching of the Trinity. It also declares that Jesus can not be the son of God because God can not have children, yet it also states that God is capable of all things.

It mentions there are corruptions in the Jewish scriptures. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove otherwise.

Originally Mohammed thought declaring himself a prophet of the Abrahamic god would make Jews and Christians follow him. When they did not do this he declared them unbelievers and began preaching hatred towards them.

Mohammeds original message was one of peace, tolerance and acceptance. This completely changed when he built up enough followers to allow him to begin conquest.

The Qu'ran claims the Earth was created for us and that the animal kingdom and humans were created at the same time. So what about the dinosaurs?

The Qu'ran claims that Adam and Eve were the first humans. However it doesn't mention what type of human they were. Were they Neanderthals? If they weren't Neanderthals then where did the Neanderthals come from?

The Qu'ran claims that God is compassionate, yet he allows one human the right to own another human.

The Qu'ran claims that God knows everything you'll do from the moment of birth to the moment of death, yet at the same time claims that life is a test. If God knows the answer already why does he need to test us?

The Qu'ran claims that God is compassionate. However God also makes people unbelievers and sends them to hell. If he's compassionate and he knows that disbelief will send you to hell for an eternity of torture why is making people disbelievers?

The Qu'ran talks about boiling water to use as a means of torture but makes no mention whatsoever of how useful it is to boil water for hygienes sake.

The Qu'ran claims that stars adorn the lowest heaven and that the Moon is in their midst. There is only one star in our solar system. However to the naked eye it does appear the way Mohammed described it.

Mohammed forced Zayd to divorce his wife and then married her himself claiming it to be "Gods will". Another example of Mohammed being greedy and lustful.

Mohammed married a 6 yr old girl and consummated the relationship when she was 9. Yes this was acceptable at the time, but if he truly was an example for "all mankind for all time" then it's something he should not have done. And surely an all knowing God would have known this isn't acceptable behaviour.
-------------------------------------------
There's loads more I could put in but I would be here all day, and I think there's plenty here to start off with. If you like I could type it all up in a document with more detailed explanation of each point.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is what you believe that Muhammad(S.A.W) had developed the Quran(By a person who could neither write nor read anything)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Was he also deaf and mute?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you are asking about those verses asking believers to kill the infidels and so on then you should have a look that what happens when people just twist verses out of context and present them as a sign of violence in the Quran.
<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060914001306AA3aptj" target="_blank">http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14001306AA3aptj</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That's not what I'm referring to at all. What I asked was "What does the Qu'ran say about the treatment of slaves who aren't Muslim".

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slapped for what....do you have the right to slap me???<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No I don't have the right to slap, but it would be my moral duty to do it. I would slap you for placing the blame of a man attacking a woman on the man's wife. It would be the man's fault, nobody elses. A good man wouldn't attack a woman regardless of circumstances, and a moral person definitely wouldn't lay the blame on anyone but the attackers.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If a man is married to a women and he provides her everything of which she is in need of.He treats her with respect.kindness and love still then if the women refuses to comply with her husband...........what if the men refused to have sex with his wife.....how would you view it now.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I wouldn't care if a man gave his wife the Earth on a platter of gold and jewels, she still has the right to refuse sex. And what if the man refused to have sex with his wife? It would be his right just as it's the woman's right to say no.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As far as sex with slave girls is concerned here is what the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad say to those who by force have sex with their wives and slave girls:

Spoiler

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29

Narrated Al-Ma'rur: At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names." The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.

None of that mentions anything to do with forced sex with a slave. It talks about how a Muslim should treat a slave who is Muslim. What it really should be saying is that the slave owner should be setting the slave free, anything else is immoral, unjust and inhumane.

Spoiler

Saheeh Muslim

Book 015, Number 4082:

Hilal b. Yasaf reported that a person got angry and slapped his slave-girl. Thereupon Suwaid b. Muqarrin said to him: You could find no other part (to slap) but the prominent part of her face. See I was one of the seven sons of Muqarrin, and we had but only one slave-girl. The youngest of us slapped her, and Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) commanded us to set her free.

Again, it doesn't mention anything about forced sex being wrong. It mentions a slave being set free as punishment for their master hitting them in the face. The Qu'ran already mentions that hitting a woman in the face isn't allowed so therefore the slave owner is being punished for breaking this rule, the punishment is the loss of a slave. Also ask yourself, why is the slave only being freed as punishment for the slaves master, why is the slave not being set free because it's wrong for a human to own another human?

Spoiler

Book 015, Number 4086

Abu Mas'ud al-Badri reported: "I was beating my slave with a whip when I heard a voice behind me: Understand, Abu Masud; but I did not recognise the voice due to intense anger. He (Abu Mas'ud) reported: As he came near me (I found) that he was the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and he was saying: Bear in mind, Abu Mas'ud; bear in mind. Abu Mas'ud. He (Aba Maslad) said: threw the whip from my hand. Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Bear in mind, Abu Mas'ud; verily Allah has more dominance upon you than you have upon your slave. I (then) said: I would never beat my servant in future.

Again this mentions nothing about forced sex with a slave.

Spoiler

O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower [money given by the husband to the wife for the marriage contract] ye have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good (Qu’ran An-nisa 19)

And again, this mentions nothing about sex with slaves. In fact this verse isn't even referring to slaves at all. See the spoiler for an explanation from a tafsir :

Spoiler

(O ye who believe! It is not lawful for you forcibly to inherit the women (of your deceased kinsmen)…) [4:19]. Abu Bakr al-Asfahani informed us> ‘Abd Allah ibn Muhammad al-Asfahani> Abu Yahya> Sahl ibn ‘Uthman> Asbat ibn Muhammad> al-Shaybani> ‘Ikrimah> Ibn ‘Abbas (Abu Ishaq al-Shaybani mentioned that ‘Ata’ ibn al-Husayn al-Suwa‘i also related this tradition, and I do not think he related it from other than Ibn ‘Abbas) who said regarding the verse (O ye who believe! It is not lawful for you forcibly to inherit the women (of your deceased kinsmen): “It was the habit that, when a man died, his heirs had a better right to his wife, if one of them wished he would marry her, if not they married her off to somebody else or, alternately, leave her unmarried, for they had a better right to her than her own family. This verse was revealed about this issue”. This was related by Bukhari in the chapter on Tafsir from Muhammad ibn Muqatil and he also related it in the chapter on Coercion from Husayn ibn Mansur and both his narrators related it from Asbat. The commentators of the Qur’an said: “In the pre-Islamic and beginning of the Islamic eras, if a man died and was survived by his wife, it was the custom that his son from another wife or his relative from his clan would come and throw his cloak on that woman, and this gesture entailed that he had a better right over her than she had on her own person or that anyone else had on her. If he then wished to marry her, he married her without giving her any dowry, except for the dowry which was given to her by her deceased husband. Alternately, he could marry her to someone else and take all her dowry, giving her nothing in exchange. Or, he could leave her unmarried to hurt her so that she would buy herself from him in exchange for what she inherited from her deceased husband, or wait until she died so that he inherits her. When Abu Qays ibn al-Aslat al-Ansari died, he was survived by his wife Kubayshah bint Ma‘an al-Ansariyyah. One of his sons, from another wife, by the name of Hisn (Muqatil stated that his name was Qays ibn Abi Qays) placed his cloak on her and, thus, inherited the right to her marriage.

So as you can see it had nothing at all to do with slaves or slavery.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Something Important on Slavery:

<a href="http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/2006/03/slavery_in_isla.html" target="_blank">http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...ry_in_isla.html</a>

<a href="http://www.understanding-islam.com/discussions/social-issues/if-islam-wanted-to-discourage-slavery-then-why-did-the-prophet-keep-a-slave-girl" target="_blank">http://www.understanding-islam.com/discuss...ep-a-slave-girl</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Something more important about slavery - it's unjust, immoral and inhumane. A human is not a commodity to be sold, bought and owned.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slaves weren't like pets or video games as you have quoted them.Slaves weren't those who were treated like servants or tools which were to be used at any time.You really need to re-read the entire Islamic History or I guess your memory is weak.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Why do I need to re-read the entire Islamic history? What exactly am I missing here, please do explain.

 

[Pyrmon]

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sorry, I just don't believe you. If I was to do a search for your name (real name and user name) would I turn up any results of you talking about Islam as being your religion dating before the beginning of this thread? And what I meant by you refusing to criticise Islam where necessary was just that, nothing to do with you refuting my criticisms. You have refused to criticise the Qu'ran, whereas most people who aren't Muslims who defend the Qu'ran also criticise where criticism is necessary.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll do that for you. I tried searching my name and username on Google, ringing up a total of three results, one of which have a connection to me, but not to Islam. The second is some french video game forum. The third is a(closed) YouTube account I'm not sure about. I don't think I ever had a YouTube account, but I guess it's still possible. You could also look up my username(old one, as my new one is, well, new) and Islam. I did and it mostly points to this thread, the "What's your religion" thread and that closed YouTube account. As I said, I newly converted. Whether you believe me or not I could care less as it really changes nothing.
Can you be clearer about that whole criticism thing? I'm not sure I understand as English isn't my native language.


<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Nowhere in the Sura does it say "This is only acceptable if...". At best it advises against, at worst it's a tenuous contradiction.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It says it is ok to marry other wives to help orphans and that if a man can't treat them equally, he shall only have one(4:3). Then 4:129 comes along and says: Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). Thus prohibiting polygamy. It isn't directly banned it because it could still be useful if the male population got critically low again in the future.

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm afraid that's not possible. Whether you follow them or not or whether you believe they are part of Islam or not is irrelevant. They are a valid source of Islamic history. They also show the true face of Mohammed, who is supposed to be "the example for all mankind". They also show what the true meanings of verses were along with the Tafsir written closer to the time of Mohammed. If you're going to go by the logic that you don't accept them because they were written by mankind a couple of hundred years after the Qu'ran then the same would also hold true of the Qu'ran that you use. <b>The Qu'ran you use was compiled and scribed by Uthman, a couple of hundred years after the death of Mohammed</b>. Before you go on about the whole "God promised to keep it protected" remember that argument holds no weight whatsoever unless you can prove the existence of the Abrahamic god or you can show me a copy of the Qu'ran from pre-Uthman era that looks exactly like the Qu'ran you use today. Otherwise it's not really any different than saying "Santa Clause promised to keep the Qu'ran free from change".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
`Uthman ibn `Affan (Arabic: عثمان بن عفان‎) <b>(c. 579 – 17 July 656)</b>
Wrong Uthman, mate. The compilation started 19 years after Muhammad's death.
I don't care what is written in the Hadith. I have all of my religious teachings coming from the Qur'an. They are useless in a religion debate as they are not a religious text. If you try to use the Hadith, I'll simply ignore it. It holds no weight whatsoever.

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Verses in the Qu'ran promoting slavery :

Spoiler

Qu'ran 4:36 - Worship Allah and associate nothing with Him, and to parents do good, and to relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbor, the neighbor farther away, the companion at your side, the traveler, and those whom your right hands possess. Indeed, Allah does not like those who are self-deluding and boastful.

Qu'ran 4:92 - And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased's family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer - then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty - then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] - then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah . And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 23:6 - Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed

Qu'ran 24:31 - And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.

Qu'ran 24:58 - O you who have believed, let those whom your right hands possess and those who have not [yet] reached puberty among you ask permission of you [before entering] at three times: before the dawn prayer and when you put aside your clothing [for rest] at noon and after the night prayer. [These are] three times of privacy for you. There is no blame upon you nor upon them beyond these [periods], for they continually circulate among you - some of you, among others. Thus does Allah make clear to you the verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 33:50 - O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.

Qu'ran 33:55 - There is no blame upon women concerning their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons or their women or those their right hands possess. And fear Allah . Indeed Allah is ever, over all things, Witness.

Regardless of how well those slaves were treated the Qu'ran is a book that is supposed to be the guiding light of morals for all mankind for all time. Why is it even saying that owning another human is acceptable? Owning another human being is unacceptable. Say it with me now "The Qu'ran is wrong for saying owning another human being is acceptable". And why is the Abrahamic god telling Mohammed that it's ok to capture women during war and use them for sexual playthings? Shouldn't a perfect, compassionate and understanding deity be saying the complete opposite? And yes, each time you say "Well they weren't as badly treated" is justifying slavery. You're saying "Well they couldn't have been all bad, at least they treated them ok". When really what you should be saying is "Under no circumstances is owning a human being ok" and ending it there. Any human being with even a grain of compassion of their mindset knows that owning a human being, regardless of circumstance or treatment, is immoral, unjust and inhumane.

Now I have the same challenge in reverse. Show me the sections in the Qu'ran that states that owning another human being is immoral, unjust, inhumane and should never happen in any circumstances whatsoever.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't see any promoting here. I don't see the Quran saying it's acceptable either. All I see are verses that say to free your slaves at every occasion, if you have any. And if you do have any because you newly converted and lived in a country were it is socially acceptable to own another human being, you must free them and help get into society by giving them money(Zakat). While you are in the process of freeing your slaves, you must treat them as if they were free men. Oh and Ma Malakat Aymanukum(those your right hand possess) can have different meanings other than slave.
Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.

 

[Ace Overclocked]

<!--quoteo(post=3723354:date=Jun 18 2011, 05:06 PM:name=Pyrmon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pyrmon @ Jun 18 2011, 05:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3723354"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sorry, I just don't believe you. If I was to do a search for your name (real name and user name) would I turn up any results of you talking about Islam as being your religion dating before the beginning of this thread? And what I meant by you refusing to criticise Islam where necessary was just that, nothing to do with you refuting my criticisms. You have refused to criticise the Qu'ran, whereas most people who aren't Muslims who defend the Qu'ran also criticise where criticism is necessary.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll do that for you. I tried searching my name and username on Google, ringing up a total of three results, one of which have a connection to me, but not to Islam. The second is some french video game forum. The third is a(closed) YouTube account I'm not sure about. I don't think I ever had a YouTube account, but I guess it's still possible. You could also look up my username(old one, as my new one is, well, new) and Islam. I did and it mostly points to this thread, the "What's your religion" thread and that closed YouTube account. As I said, I newly converted. Whether you believe me or not I could care less as it really changes nothing.
Can you be clearer about that whole criticism thing? I'm not sure I understand as English isn't my native language.


<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Nowhere in the Sura does it say "This is only acceptable if...". At best it advises against, at worst it's a tenuous contradiction.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It says it is ok to marry other wives to help orphans and that if a man can't treat them equally, he shall only have one(4:3). Then 4:129 comes along and says: Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). Thus prohibiting polygamy. It isn't directly banned it because it could still be useful if the male population got critically low again in the future.

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm afraid that's not possible. Whether you follow them or not or whether you believe they are part of Islam or not is irrelevant. They are a valid source of Islamic history. They also show the true face of Mohammed, who is supposed to be "the example for all mankind". They also show what the true meanings of verses were along with the Tafsir written closer to the time of Mohammed. If you're going to go by the logic that you don't accept them because they were written by mankind a couple of hundred years after the Qu'ran then the same would also hold true of the Qu'ran that you use. <b>The Qu'ran you use was compiled and scribed by Uthman, a couple of hundred years after the death of Mohammed</b>. Before you go on about the whole "God promised to keep it protected" remember that argument holds no weight whatsoever unless you can prove the existence of the Abrahamic god or you can show me a copy of the Qu'ran from pre-Uthman era that looks exactly like the Qu'ran you use today. Otherwise it's not really any different than saying "Santa Clause promised to keep the Qu'ran free from change".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
`Uthman ibn `Affan (Arabic: عثمان بن عفان‎) <b>(c. 579 – 17 July 656)</b>
Wrong Uthman, mate. The compilation started 19 years after Muhammad's death.
I don't care what is written in the Hadith. I have all of my religious teachings coming from the Qur'an. They are useless in a religion debate as they are not a religious text. If you try to use the Hadith, I'll simply ignore it. It holds no weight whatsoever.

<!--quoteo(post=3722945:date=Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3722945"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Verses in the Qu'ran promoting slavery :

Spoiler

Qu'ran 4:36 - Worship Allah and associate nothing with Him, and to parents do good, and to relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbor, the neighbor farther away, the companion at your side, the traveler, and those whom your right hands possess. Indeed, Allah does not like those who are self-deluding and boastful.

Qu'ran 4:92 - And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased's family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer - then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty - then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] - then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah . And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 23:6 - Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed

Qu'ran 24:31 - And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.

Qu'ran 24:58 - O you who have believed, let those whom your right hands possess and those who have not [yet] reached puberty among you ask permission of you [before entering] at three times: before the dawn prayer and when you put aside your clothing [for rest] at noon and after the night prayer. [These are] three times of privacy for you. There is no blame upon you nor upon them beyond these [periods], for they continually circulate among you - some of you, among others. Thus does Allah make clear to you the verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise.

Qu'ran 33:50 - O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.

Qu'ran 33:55 - There is no blame upon women concerning their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their brothers' sons or their sisters' sons or their women or those their right hands possess. And fear Allah . Indeed Allah is ever, over all things, Witness.

Regardless of how well those slaves were treated the Qu'ran is a book that is supposed to be the guiding light of morals for all mankind for all time. Why is it even saying that owning another human is acceptable? Owning another human being is unacceptable. Say it with me now "The Qu'ran is wrong for saying owning another human being is acceptable". And why is the Abrahamic god telling Mohammed that it's ok to capture women during war and use them for sexual playthings? Shouldn't a perfect, compassionate and understanding deity be saying the complete opposite? And yes, each time you say "Well they weren't as badly treated" is justifying slavery. You're saying "Well they couldn't have been all bad, at least they treated them ok". When really what you should be saying is "Under no circumstances is owning a human being ok" and ending it there. Any human being with even a grain of compassion of their mindset knows that owning a human being, regardless of circumstance or treatment, is immoral, unjust and inhumane.

Now I have the same challenge in reverse. Show me the sections in the Qu'ran that states that owning another human being is immoral, unjust, inhumane and should never happen in any circumstances whatsoever.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't see any promoting here. I don't see the Quran saying it's acceptable either. All I see are verses that say to free your slaves at every occasion, if you have any. And if you do have any because you newly converted and lived in a country were it is socially acceptable to own another human being, you must free them and help get into society by giving them money(Zakat). While you are in the process of freeing your slaves, you must treat them as if they were free men. Oh and Ma Malakat Aymanukum(those your right hand possess) can have different meanings other than slave.
Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i agree on most of this

 

[Magmorph]

Real Muslims are those who do not follow the Majority. They are the ones who follow the teachings of the Qur'an and live in peacefully, both inward and outward. It is the very meaning and definition of the word Muslim.
My view of a Muslim is supported by the Qur'an. The ones who are wrong are those who would call me an apostate, as they do not follow the real teachings of the Qur'an.

Religious text do not have a correct interpretation. People have a tendency to project their personal views on a religious text. It is easy to make a religious book say almost anything you want it to depending on how you choose to interpret it. I don't think it is good to have a mentality to view everyone who disagrees with your view about Muslims as wrong. I guarantee you that the people you think are wrong are going to have the same mentality about you.

I have to compliment you on your English. I would never have guessed it isn't your native language.

 

[Pyrmon]

Real Muslims are those who do not follow the Majority. They are the ones who follow the teachings of the Qur'an and live in peacefully, both inward and outward. It is the very meaning and definition of the word Muslim.
My view of a Muslim is supported by the Qur'an. The ones who are wrong are those who would call me an apostate, as they do not follow the real teachings of the Qur'an.

Religious text do not have a correct interpretation. People have a tendency to project their personal views on a religious text. It is easy to make a religious book say almost anything you want it to depending on how you choose to interpret it. I don't think it is good to have a mentality to view everyone who disagrees with your view about Muslims as wrong. I guarantee you that the people you think are wrong are going to have the same mentality about you.

I have to compliment you on your English. I would never have guessed it isn't your native language.

The thing is, my definition of a Muslim is the definition of the very word Muslim. Even if you don't take into account the Qur'an, the word Islam means inner and outer peace achieved by the submission of your will to the One true God. That one word represents this concept. A Muslim is one who achieves said inner and outer peace by the submission of his will to the one true God. It's what the very word means. It is the universally accepted definition of Muslim. Anyone who does not abide by these criteria isn't Muslim. Any "Muslim" who hurts another hasn't achieved outer peace, so isn't a true Muslim. A "Muslim" who does good deeds for the bad reasons or thinks bad things(like that he is superior to others) hasn't achieved inner piece, so isn't Muslim. In the same way that anyone who achieved inner and outer peace but didn't submit his will to the one true God isn't Muslim.
Those who think I am wrong about this definition are the ones who promote violence, hatred and ignorance. They are the ones who are wrong.

Thanks for the compliment. I'm still working on my English though. Mostly orally. Funny thing is that I live in an completely French environment and learned English from playing Pokemon and Zelda.

 

[Magmorph]

The thing is, my definition of a Muslim is the definition of the very word Muslim. Even if you don't take into account the Qur'an, the word Islam means inner and outer peace achieved by the submission of your will to the One true God. That one word represents this concept. A Muslim is one who achieves said inner and outer peace by the submission of his will to the one true God. It's what the very word means. It is the universally accepted definition of Muslim. Anyone who does not abide by these criteria isn't Muslim. Any "Muslim" who hurts another hasn't achieved outer peace, so isn't a true Muslim. A "Muslim" who does good deeds for the bad reasons or thinks bad things(like that he is superior to others) hasn't achieved inner piece, so isn't Muslim. In the same way that anyone who achieved inner and outer peace but didn't submit his will to the one true God isn't Muslim.
Those who think I am wrong about this definition are the ones who promote violence, hatred and ignorance. They are the ones who are wrong.

Thanks for the compliment. I'm still working on my English though. Mostly orally. Funny thing is that I live in an completely French environment and learned English from playing Pokemon and Zelda.

The word Muslim is generally used to describe someone who adheres to the religion. I could take a literal meaning of the word Christian(Christ like) and apply it to someone who does not follow the religion of Christianity but it is generally accepted that when you call someone a Christian or a Muslim it is because of their religion. Things like inner and outer peace are not very objective terms and they leave the definition of the word open to interpretation. Not everyone has the same definition of what is peaceful and what is not. Religions leave too much open for interpretation. I can see your beliefs differ greatly from those of bsfmtl123, but you both call yourselves Muslim. How do you come to the conclusion that your beliefs are correct?

 

[Maz7006]

in my life time, i've seen Muslims kill Muslims, and Christians kill Christians, and whatever killing whatever, i've been through a lot of crap that made me question my religious values which i think i have just given up on now.

i dnt believe in signs of judgement day; i'd rather think of the causes that will lead up to it (if this judgement day ever exists that is)

The thing is, my definition of a Muslim is the definition of the very word Muslim. Even if you don't take into account the Qur'an, the word Islam means inner and outer peace achieved by the submission of your will to the One true God. That one word represents this concept. A Muslim is one who achieves said inner and outer peace by the submission of his will to the one true God. It's what the very word means. It is the universally accepted definition of Muslim. Anyone who does not abide by these criteria isn't Muslim. Any "Muslim" who hurts another hasn't achieved outer peace, so isn't a true Muslim. A "Muslim" who does good deeds for the bad reasons or thinks bad things(like that he is superior to others) hasn't achieved inner piece, so isn't Muslim. In the same way that anyone who achieved inner and outer peace but didn't submit his will to the one true God isn't Muslim.
Those who think I am wrong about this definition are the ones who promote violence, hatred and ignorance. They are the ones who are wrong.

i remember back in the day, once at a friday prayer, a shaikh was talking about this. Although it is valid what you are saying, submitting yourself to god is not enough . You see muslims these days pray and what not, but wont hesitate to lie, steal or kill. I don;t believe in much these days, but regardless simply just believing in god and submitting yourself to him is not enough

 

[TrolleyDave]

I'll do that for you. I tried searching my name and username on Google, ringing up a total of three results, one of which have a connection to me, but not to Islam. The second is some french video game forum. The third is a(closed) YouTube account I'm not sure about. I don't think I ever had a YouTube account, but I guess it's still possible. You could also look up my username(old one, as my new one is, well, new) and Islam. I did and it mostly points to this thread, the "What's your religion" thread and that closed YouTube account. As I said, I newly converted. Whether you believe me or not I could care less as it really changes nothing.
Can you be clearer about that whole criticism thing? I'm not sure I understand as English isn't my native language.

I'll leave it at that, but I don't believe for one second you converted after this thread was opened.

What I mean by the whole criticism thing is that you refuse to criticise Islam where it's appropriate. Most people I've met who argue for the Qu'ran but aren't Muslims have no problems criticisng Islam where it needs to be criticised. Again your response to slavery in Islam is a perfect example. You refuse to say that Islam is wrong for saying it's ok to have slaves.

And your English is definitely good seeing as how you're not a native speaker.

It says it is ok to marry other wives to help orphans and that if a man can't treat them equally, he shall only have one(4:3). Then 4:129 comes along and says: Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). Thus prohibiting polygamy. It isn't directly banned it because it could still be useful if the male population got critically low again in the future.

That is you superimposing your own morality onto Islam. Here is an official fatwa on the matter. http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.ph...Id&Id=81469

The only stipulation for polygamy is that the husband can treat all wives equitably. Nothing more, nothing less. While I salute and support your modernisation of the Qu'ran and it's morals what you're preaching isn't what is taught in mainstream Islam nor is it what was taught by Mohammed and his companions.

Wrong Uthman, mate. The compilation started 19 years after Muhammad's death.

My mistake and my apologies. However, as you know the story of how it was compiled then you also know the lengths they went to ensure that the version scribed was completely authentic. Very similar measurements were used to safeguard the authenticity of the Hadiths, hence their separation into Weak, Strong etc. There is a whole Islamic "science" regarding the transmissions of the Hadith taking them back to the companions themselves. The strong Hadiths (Sahih) are no more fallible than the Uthman Qu'ran.

I don't care what is written in the Hadith. I have all of my religious teachings coming from the Qur'an. They are useless in a religion debate as they are not a religious text. If you try to use the Hadith, I'll simply ignore it. It holds no weight whatsoever.

Whether you believe they hold no weight whatsoever is irrelevant. They are authentic Islam, authentic Islamic history, the closest you'll get to an honest biography of Mohammed and also authentic Arabic history to a minor extent. As a source of biography for Mohammed himself there is no better. Most new Muslims are taught that they should emulate Mohammed as closely in deed and action (and in some extreme sects appearance, although I don't consider you anywhere near this category). Without the Hadith how would this be possible? Then there's also the case of some of the missing info. There's detailed information about things like zakat and salat in there that's not in the Qu'ran.

QUOTE

I don't see any promoting here. I don't see the Quran saying it's acceptable either. All I see are verses that say to free your slaves at every occasion, if you have any. And if you do have any because you newly converted and lived in a country were it is socially acceptable to own another human being, you must free them and help get into society by giving them money(Zakat). While you are in the process of freeing your slaves, you must treat them as if they were free men. Oh and Ma Malakat Aymanukum(those your right hand possess) can have different meanings other than slave.

lol That actually made me laugh out loud. I've heard some apologist rubbish in my time but that takes the biscuit. Show me the verse I posted that says free your slaves at every occasion. The only one I posted that even related to the freeing of a slave was this one :

Spoiler

Qu'ran 4:92 - And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased's family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer - then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty - then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] - then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah . And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

All that mentions is setting a slave free if a Muslim kills another Muslim by accident. Along with the stipulation that the slave must be Muslim themself. How is that "at every opportunity"?

Where does it also state that those slaves must be slaves you brought with you on conversion? Also, where exactly in those verses I posted does it say you must give them zakat and free immediately?

Those verses clearly show that owning a slave is acceptable. If owning a slave was unacceptable it also wouldn't mention sex with slaves as being Halal, it would clearly state that they were considered Haram. And just think of how much quicker slavery in Arabia would have disappeared if he had just said that.

I know that phrase can have other meanings, but in the context of these verses it's slave. The tafsirs all agree on this.

QUOTE

Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.

The Qu'ran clearly states that captive women are lawful for sex.

Spoiler

Quran 33:50 - "O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful."

 

[bsfmtl123]

<b>First Half:</b>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You can call it "misleading or play on words" but there are certain circumstances including the consent of the first wife.
Women population much higher than men(one reason),that is why Quran ALLOWS(but does not order) four marriages.

No, that's why it was allowed. There is nothing in the Qu'ran that says "This is the only time this is acceptable". Seeing as how the book claims to be "perfectly clear" then if it was only allowed in those circumstances it would state it. All it does is suggest against it and leave it wide open to interpretation<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

NOTEolygamy was common in Arabia and other civilizations.Islam did not initiate polygamy but in fact restricted the number of wives a man could marry.

Women population was much higher than men when it was allowed.The verses which allowed polygamy were revealed after the Battle of Uhud in which many Muslims were killed,leaving widows and orphans for whom due care was incumbent upon the Muslim survivors.The Quran says,

"Marry women of your choice two or three or four;but if you fear that you shall not be
able to deal justly(with them),then only one or (a captive) that your right hands possess.
That will be more suitable to prevent you doing injustice."(4:3)

It is to be noted that polygamy is neither mandatory,nor encouraged but merely permitted.Permission to practice polygamy is not associated with mere satisfaction of passion.It is rather associated with compassion toward widows and orphans,<b>a matter that is confirmed by atmosphere in which the verse was revealed.</b>
Dealing justly with one's wives is an obligation.This applies to housing,food,clothing,kind treatment.....etc..,for which the husband is completely responsible.If one is not sure of being able to deal justly with them,the Quran says,

"Then (marry) only one."(4:3)

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not the Prophet but Only Allah has the authority to change any rule in the Quran.Women population in the present century is also higher than men in some places..................Allah created every rule in the Quran for a purpose.....It might be possible that you may not be able to find any reason for it now but later u will be.


No, a prophet can change the rules as well as the prophet can state that "God told me to change it". No, the Abrahamic god didn't create every rule in the Qu'ran. Mohammed created every rule in the Qu'ran, he just claimed to be speaking for the Abrahamic god.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

No a Prophet cannot change any rule according to his will.This is what you believe about Muhammad(S.A.W) but the Quran itself states,
"Nor does he say anything of his own desire.It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him."(Surah An-Najm)

Was Muhammad(S.A.W) a liar (NO):
<a href="http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/168/" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/168/" target="_blank">http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/168/</a></a>

Or

Was Muhammad(S.A.W) a Insane, a Poet, or a Sorcerer (NO):
<a href="http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/167/" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/167/" target="_blank">http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/167/</a></a>

Or refer to this:
<a href="http://www.thewaytotruth.org/theholyquran/wordofgod.html" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.thewaytotruth.org/theholyquran/wordofgod.html" target="_blank">http://www.thewaytotruth.org/theholyquran/wordofgod.html</a></a>


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Worldly needs and desires have crept in to their daily lives.Out of hundred only 5 or 4 Muslims can be true followers(I am talking about the present century).People have made sects for their own reliability and remember that every Muslim is not a Sunni or a Shia.Muslims are fighting with each other,hostilities,ignorance........If Muslims are not following Islam in true letters spirit then how can anyone judge Islam according to them.


And how can you be sure that you are following Islam in it's true spirit? To follow Islam in it's true spirit you must following what Mohammed and his companions taught. Are you following everything that they taught or are you superimposing your own morality code on top of Islam to come up with your own version?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

By following the Quran and the example of the Holy Prophet(S.A.W).I follow the Holy Prophet(S.A.W) in not every aspect because it's not possible to cover every aspect at the age of 16 but as far as my knowledge exceeds I always follow his example.No, never! i always stay on to the pure Islamic principals not any other teachings(ex: shia).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yes but there are some bodily and physical differences between them.For example:Women have big breasts but men don't.


Ok, but there aren't many women that would actually want to wander around in public with their tits hanging out. Men are allowed to bare their stomachs (Mohammed himself rode around topless), are women allowed to show their stomachs?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

When and where did Muhammad(S.A.W) rode topless?Please quote any verse which says men are allowed to bare their stomachs.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Can you please explain the concept of Abrahamic God?


The Abrahamic god is the one you follow.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The One which I follow is Allah(the One and Only).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is what you believe that Muhammad(S.A.W) had developed the Quran(By a person who could neither write nor read anything)


Was he also deaf and mute?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Of course not.

Prophet Muhammad was an illiterate man who had no formal education in any science, language, religious or secular.

Quran speaks about a variety of branches of science like: Astronomy, Embryology, Hydrology, Geology, Sociology, Psychology, Oceanography, Law etc. including lots of scientific statements that were validated only recently and were not known in the time of the prophet.

It was not known about prophet Muhammad any scholarly tendencies or achievements until the age of forty (when he received the first verses of Quran). So, how this illiterate man suddenly brings about a book like the Quran including an ideological and religious revolution that changed history?

Why prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), if he authored the Quran, honor the virgin Mary (May Allah be pleased with her), the mother of Jesus (peace be on him) as the best woman over all women on earth over all ages until day of judgment (an honor that even not offered by the bible) while not mentioning his own family members with a single word and even not mentioning any name of them.?

If he had authored the Quran, why he didn't claim this authorship of Quran and consequently gaining higher prestige among his followers who may consider him as a God.

Why he mentioned Quran verses that reprimand him (as that of chapter 33, verse 37 and chapter 80 verses 1-3) if he wrote Quran by himself?.

Source:http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_Quran_the_true_word_of_God

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you are asking about those verses asking believers to kill the infidels and so on then you should have a look that what happens when people just twist verses out of context and present them as a sign of violence in the Quran.
<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14001306AA3aptj" target="_blank"><a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14001306AA3aptj" target="_blank">http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14001306AA3aptj</a></a>


That's not what I'm referring to at all. What I asked was "What does the Qu'ran say about the treatment of slaves who aren't Muslim".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

There treatment is the same as treatment of Non-Muslims(who aren't slaves).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slapped for what....do you have the right to slap me???


No I don't have the right to slap, but it would be my moral duty to do it. I would slap you for placing the blame of a man attacking a woman on the man's wife. It would be the man's fault, nobody elses. A good man wouldn't attack a woman regardless of circumstances, and a moral person definitely wouldn't lay the blame on anyone but the attackers.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't understand what are you trying to say....please re-post it in a bit clearer version.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If a man is married to a women and he provides her everything of which she is in need of.He treats her with respect.kindness and love still then if the women refuses to comply with her husband...........what if the men refused to have sex with his wife.....how would you view it now.


I wouldn't care if a man gave his wife the Earth on a platter of gold and jewels, she still has the right to refuse sex. And what if the man refused to have sex with his wife? It would be his right just as it's the woman's right to say no.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Sex is a basic instinct.............if both of those are married and don't have sex.....what would it result in?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As far as sex with slave girls is concerned here is what the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad say to those who by force have sex with their wives and slave girls:


Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29

Narrated Al-Ma'rur: At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names." The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.


None of that mentions anything to do with forced sex with a slave. It talks about how a Muslim should treat a slave who is Muslim. What it really should be saying is that the slave owner should be setting the slave free, anything else is immoral, unjust and inhumane.



Again, it doesn't mention anything about forced sex being wrong. It mentions a slave being set free as punishment for their master hitting them in the face. The Qu'ran already mentions that hitting a woman in the face isn't allowed so therefore the slave owner is being punished for breaking this rule, the punishment is the loss of a slave. Also ask yourself, why is the slave only being freed as punishment for the slaves master, why is the slave not being set free because it's wrong for a human to own another human?


Again this mentions nothing about forced sex with a slave.



And again, this mentions nothing about sex with slaves. In fact this verse isn't even referring to slaves at all. See the spoiler for an explanation from a tafsir :



So as you can see it had nothing at all to do with slaves or slavery.

QUOTE

Something Important on Slavery:

<a href="http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...ry_in_isla.html" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...ry_in_isla.html" target="_blank">http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...ry_in_isla.html</a></a>

<a href="http://www.understanding-islam.com/discuss...ep-a-slave-girl" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.understanding-islam.com/discuss...ep-a-slave-girl" target="_blank">http://www.understanding-islam.com/discuss...ep-a-slave-girl</a></a>


Something more important about slavery - it's unjust, immoral and inhumane. A human is not a commodity to be sold, bought and owned.

QUOTE
Slaves weren't like pets or video games as you have quoted them.Slaves weren't those who were treated like servants or tools which were to be used at any time.You really need to re-read the entire Islamic History or I guess your memory is weak.


Why do I need to re-read the entire Islamic history? What exactly am I missing here, please do explain.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

All the above Verses and Hadith are on the rights of Slaves.

Here is what Islam say to those who by force have sex with their wives (or slave girls is the same):

<a href="http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/Women/rape_in_islam.asp" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/Women/rape_in_islam.asp" target="_blank">http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/Women/rape_in_islam.asp</a></a>

<a href="http://www.submission.org/women/[censored].html" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.submission.org/women/" target="_blank">http://www.submission.org/women/</a>[censored].html</a>

Slavery is unjust, immoral and inhumane according to it's general statement or meaning or that practiced by Non-Muslims but it's not the same taking in consideration the description laid by Islam.

You previously said that slaves were like video games and pets but this was not the way they were treated...............to find out this you need to re-read Islamic History.

And the point you previously raised about wife beating ...........there is no wife beating(according to many scholars it is but this man's point has weight):
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE&feature=relmfu" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE...;feature=relmfu" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE...;feature=relmfu</a></a>
(Allah Knows Best)


<!--hr--><hr title=""/><!--/hr--><b><!--sizeo:1--><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Posts merged<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--></b>

<b>Second Half:
</b>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Some evidence that Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran :<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The very first verses that you quoted about questioning the Prophet(S.A.W) have again been twisted out of context.The Prophet(S.A.W) had always consulted his companions in all matters(such as battle of Trench and Uhud).He always took the views of other people into consideration.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Another verse telling people not to converse with Mohammed. This verse was also "miraculously" sent down at a time when Mohammed was beginning to become annoyed with people questioning him. The only reason he would not want people questioning him is if he had something to hide and was worried about being caught out<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is again a self opinion about Muhammad and the verse.Were u inside Muhammad(S.A.W) or could read his heart and feelings to tell that he was annoyed.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Surely anyone who was speaking for God would have no problems answering all the questions that humanity could throw at him.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You just quoted verses and gave your view or interpretation of the verse.You didn't even quote one question that was left unanswered.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's also another rule specifically for Mohammed which declares that no-one may marry his wives after he dies. Was he worried that information might slip pointing towards the fact that he was making it all up as he went along?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is again a twist of words.Quran clearly states that they were the Mothers of the Faithful.All his wives were a complete guidance for women to follow.They were the women of great knowledge and dignity.Even the Prophet's companions consulted them and learned from them.

If Muhammad(S.A.W)'s wives knew his secrets then why would they remain Muslims.They would have told everyone after his death that he wasn't a true Messenger.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mohammed gets the greater share of war booty. And why would God (a being supposedly beyond our comprehension, free from the trappings of Earthly desires and a being who could create anything he wants) need war booty? In otherwords, the war booty is for Mohammed but it sounds better if it's for God.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It's not that Allah needs booty.It means to spend the booty in His way(ex:helping poor,widows and orphans).


<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Qu'ran 33:30 - "O wives of the Prophet, whoever of you should commit a clear immorality - for her the punishment would be doubled two fold, and ever is that, for Allah , easy." - Mohammeds wives get double punishment for misbehaving.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

For not misbehaving but committing a sin because they were the Mothers of the Faithful.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Qu'ran 16:101 - "And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse - and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down - they say, "You, [O Muhammad], are but an inventor [of lies]." But most of them do not know." - Mohammed gets caught out making it all up so God sends down a verse to back him up. This goes hand in hand with the abrogation verse.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

If he gets caught up,then the people there were fool enough to again believe in him after this verse.....Can you please quote the verse about which the Quran is talking about.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Qu'ran 18:86 - "Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it [as if] setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people. Allah said, "O Dhul-Qarnayn, either you punish [them] or else adopt among them [a way of] goodness."" - The sun does not set in a spring of dark mud nor does it appear like it sets in a spring of dark mud.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-dad389i4c[/youtube]

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Qu'ran 21:33 - "And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all [heavenly bodies] in an orbit are swimming." - The Sun does not swim along in an orbit. However this does hold up with the average thought back then that the Earth was the centre of the universe and that the Sun and the Moon orbited us rather than us orbiting the Sun.

Qu'ran 36:38 - "And the sun runs [on course] toward its stopping point. That is the determination of the Exalted in Might, the Knowing." - The Sun is stationary and does not go towards a stopping place.

Qu'ran 36:40 - "It is not allowable for the sun to reach the moon, nor does the night overtake the day, but each, in an orbit, is swimming." - Evidence that in the above verses it's talking about the Sun orbiting the Earth, and that Mohammed believed that the Sun and the Moon followed the same orbital trajectory.

Qu'ran 23:14 - "Then We made the sperm-drop into a clinging clot, and We made the clot into a lump [of flesh], and We made [from] the lump, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh; then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allah , the best of creators." - This is not how an embryo is formed at all. At no point are we a "clinging clot". Also flesh does not come after bone during the formation of a foetus, it happens all at the same time.

Qu'ran 86:6-7 - "He was created from a fluid, ejected, Emerging from between the backbone and the ribs." - That's not where sperm comes from, it is however where ancient Greek scientists and philosophers thought it came from.

Qu'ran 67:5 - "And We have certainly beautified the nearest heaven with stars and have made [from] them what is thrown at the devils and have prepared for them the punishment of the Blaze." - In reality there's no such thing as "shooting stars", stars are stationary.

Qu'ran 67:19 - "Do they not see the birds above them with wings outspread and [sometimes] folded in? None holds them [aloft] except the Most Merciful. Indeed He is, of all things, Seeing." - There is a scientific reason why birds can fly. It's not God holding them aloft. <a href="http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceS.../FlyLesson3.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceS.../FlyLesson3.htm" target="_blank">http://downloads.cas.psu.edu/4h/AerospaceS.../FlyLesson3.htm</a></a>

Qu'ran 2:222 - "They will ask you about menstruation. Say, 'It is harmful, so keep away from women during it. Do not approach them until they are purified of it, when they are purified you may approach them as Allah has ordained." - Menstruation is not harmful, it's perfectly normal and natural. There is a scientific reason for it.

There's more stuff in the Qu'ran itself that I could go on about if you like?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

An explained note on Human Embryology in Quran:
<a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm" target="_blank">http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm</a></a>

All the other so-called scientific errors in The Quran(an explanation of the verses about creation of the Universe and so on):
<a href="http://www.creationofuniverse.com/index.html" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.creationofuniverse.com/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.creationofuniverse.com/index.html</a></a>

<a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/" target="_blank">http://www.islam-guide.com/</a></a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It gets many things wrong about Christianity. Christians don't worship Jesus and Mary in place of or along with God, and not all Christians follow the teaching of the Trinity. It also declares that Jesus can not be the son of God because God can not have children, yet it also states that God is capable of all things.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Of course He is capable of all things but it has not been mentioned that which capabilities He uses.
(Allah Knows Best)

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran claims the Earth was created for us and that the animal kingdom and humans were created at the same time. So what about the dinosaurs?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Quran has not directly mentioned about dinosaurs but it does give a hint:
<a href="http://www.answering-christianity.com/dinosaurs.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.answering-christianity.com/dinosaurs.htm" target="_blank">http://www.answering-christianity.com/dinosaurs.htm</a></a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran claims that God is compassionate, yet he allows one human the right to own another human.

The Qu'ran claims that God knows everything you'll do from the moment of birth to the moment of death, yet at the same time claims that life is a test. If God knows the answer already why does he need to test us?

The Qu'ran claims that God is compassionate. However God also makes people unbelievers and sends them to hell. If he's compassionate and he knows that disbelief will send you to hell for an eternity of torture why is making people disbelievers?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

There is no doubt that He is Compassionate.You mentioned about owning another Human being but you did not mention that slave's position in the Society.

God knows what you will do(for example there are some intelligent students against some weak or dumb students the Teacher would obviously know that which student will be able to pass the Test)
He also sent plenty of Messengers for those unbelievers to repent but they did not so He has to be just in treatment with those who believe in Him and those who don't.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran talks about boiling water to use as a means of torture but makes no mention whatsoever of how useful it is to boil water for hygienes sake.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Boiling water is used to describe Hell in the Quran even if it does not mention it there are plenty of other things that it has mentioned:
<a href="http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm" target="_blank">http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm</a></a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Qu'ran claims that stars adorn the lowest heaven and that the Moon is in their midst. There is only one star in our solar system. However to the naked eye it does appear the way Mohammed described it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Does the verse say that the stars were in our solar system and does it mention about the moon being along or leveled with them.......The stars could be above the moon.
I will search on this and try to give you a better explanation.
(Allah Knows Best)

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mohammed forced Zayd to divorce his wife and then married her himself claiming it to be "Gods will". Another example of Mohammed being greedy and lustful.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Sorry but i have no idea of this and never heard of it(please post the source to it).

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mohammed married a 6 yr old girl and consummated the relationship when she was 9. Yes this was acceptable at the time, but if he truly was an example for "all mankind for all time" then it's something he should not have done. And surely an all knowing God would have known this isn't acceptable behaviour.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Muhammad(S.A.W) had not married the girl on his own but his friend Abu Bakr wanted him to marry his daughter Aisha.He used to play with Aisha until she had reached puberty and attained maturity.This does set an example for future Muslims but not to marry small children but to marry anyone seeing his virtue and the degree of piety.

It all depends upon a person that how he perceives a thing either negatively or positively.

A very good site that proves that Muhammad(S.A.W) is not the creator of Islam.
A very well description of all miracles of Islam and Quran:
<a href="http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/index.php" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/index.php" target="_blank">http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/index.php</a></a>

 

[Gh0sti]

ugh i cant believe people predict this stuff and then dump people start to give money waste their lives and time on the crack pot idiots who are out to get a quick buck

like the Bible Says no one knows, why would God let man know when he's coming that's knowledge only he know's true believers need to live like everyday that Christ is coming, that is how it is to be, being passionate followers

i hate these "false' prophets that are leading people astray if people would have common sense they wouldnt be strayed so easily

 

[Tanas]

ugh i cant believe people predict this stuff and then dump people start to give money waste their lives and time on the crack pot idiots who are out to get a quick buck

like the Bible Says no one knows, why would God let man know when he's coming that's knowledge only he know's true believers need to live like everyday that Christ is coming, that is how it is to be, being passionate followers

i hate these "false' prophets that are leading people astray if people would have common sense they wouldnt be strayed so easily

It's the lack of common sense that makes believers believe in this bullshit to begin with.

 

[Pyrmon]

<!--quoteo(post=3723929:date=Jun 18 2011, 05:26 PM:name=Maz7006)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Maz7006 @ Jun 18 2011, 05:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3723929"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->i remember back in the day, once at a friday prayer, a shaikh was talking about this. Although it is valid what you are saying, submitting yourself to god is not enough . You see muslims these days pray and what not, but wont hesitate to lie, steal or kill. I don;t believe in much these days, but regardless simply just believing in god and submitting yourself to him is not enough<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A person who truly believes and has submitted his will to God cannot hurt another living being. He won't steal and will try his best not to lie. Someone who claims to be Muslim but doesn't follow these basic and clear commandments is not Muslim.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What I mean by the whole criticism thing is that you refuse to criticise Islam where it's appropriate. Most people I've met who argue for the Qu'ran but aren't Muslims have no problems criticisng Islam where it needs to be criticised. Again your response to slavery in Islam is a perfect example. You refuse to say that Islam is wrong for saying it's ok to have slaves.

And your English is definitely good seeing as how you're not a native speaker.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I refuse to say the Qur'an is wrong about saying slavery is OK because it doesn't say so. Every criticism has an answer. As a non-Muslim I was giving you the point of view of a Muslim. It had little to do with me. Even if I had agreed to something you said, to present a Muslim's point of view I had to ignore it and find what a Muslim would respond. Which wasn't very hard considering I was practically Muslim.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That is you superimposing your own morality onto Islam. Here is an official fatwa on the matter. <a href="http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=81469" target="_blank">http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.ph...Id&Id=81469</a>

The only stipulation for polygamy is that the husband can treat all wives equitably. Nothing more, nothing less. While I salute and support your modernisation of the Qu'ran and it's morals what you're preaching isn't what is taught in mainstream Islam nor is it what was taught by Mohammed and his companions.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). (4:129) I don't see how it can get much clearer than that. Besides, that site doesn't give the full quote, so here it is: <b>If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans,</b> marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or that which your right hands possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (3)

I could care less of what is preached in mainstream Islam and in the Hadith.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My mistake and my apologies. However, as you know the story of how it was compiled then you also know the lengths they went to ensure that the version scribed was completely authentic. Very similar measurements were used to safeguard the authenticity of the Hadiths, hence their separation into Weak, Strong etc. There is a whole Islamic "science" regarding the transmissions of the Hadith taking them back to the companions themselves. The strong Hadiths (Sahih) are no more fallible than the Uthman Qu'ran.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree that there were very drastic measures taken, it doesn't change the fact that they were compiled, for the eldest, over 200 years after Muhammad's death. Do you know how a word can be deformed in a chain of 30 person playing Telephone? Here the chain is big and lasts three lifetimes. Whatever measure was taken to know were a Hadith came from, it doesn't mean they are authentic or even remotely reliable. There is a very very big difference between 19 years and two centuries. When the compilation of the Qur'an started, many of those who had memorized the Qur'an during the time of the Prophet were still alive. Verses were written down on parchment and palm leaves, a little everywhere. There were partial compilations in existence. For the Hadith, there was nothing. Oral transmission doesn't work well.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Whether you believe they hold no weight whatsoever is irrelevant. They are authentic Islam, authentic Islamic history, the closest you'll get to an honest biography of Mohammed and also authentic Arabic history to a minor extent. As a source of biography for Mohammed himself there is no better. Most new Muslims are taught that they should emulate Mohammed as closely in deed and action (and in some extreme sects appearance, although I don't consider you anywhere near this category). Without the Hadith how would this be possible? Then there's also the case of some of the missing info. There's detailed information about things like zakat and salat in there that's not in the Qu'ran.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The absence of something better doesn't make it good. What Muslims are taught today is wrong. Muhammad was the embodiment of the ideals of the Qur'an. Following his Sunna or emulating him means to follow the Qur'an. Ah, the missing info. You see, us Muslim believe Islam and all it's teachings have existed since Adam. The five pillars were given to Abraham and, thus, existed in pre-islamic times. Salat, Zakat, Hajj, Shahada and Sawn were practices that already existed before Muhammad. To get the real form of Salat, one must simply remove the parts that don't make sense. Like including Muhammad in the Shahada. It goes against the commandment to consider all prophets equal. And the five times of prayer are mentioned in the Qur'an along with the basic positions(bowing, prostrating, etc).

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->lol That actually made me laugh out loud. I've heard some apologist rubbish in my time but that takes the biscuit. Show me the verse I posted that says free your slaves at every occasion. The only one I posted that even related to the freeing of a slave was this one :

Spoiler

Qu'ran 4:92 - And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake. And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave and a compensation payment presented to the deceased's family [is required] unless they give [up their right as] charity. But if the deceased was from a people at war with you and he was a believer - then [only] the freeing of a believing slave; and if he was from a people with whom you have a treaty - then a compensation payment presented to his family and the freeing of a believing slave. And whoever does not find [one or cannot afford to buy one] - then [instead], a fast for two months consecutively, [seeking] acceptance of repentance from Allah . And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

All that mentions is setting a slave free if a Muslim kills another Muslim by accident. Along with the stipulation that the slave must be Muslim themself. How is that "at every opportunity"?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You didn't post all the verses that mention slaves, here:

Spoiler

But those who divorce their wives by Zihar, then wish to go back on the words they uttered― (it is ordained that such a one) <b>should free a slave</b> before they touch each other: this are ye admonished to perform: and Allah is well-acquainted with (all) that ye do. (3)

Spoiler

Allah will not call you to account for what is void in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed then indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or <b>give a slave his freedom</b>. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth Allah make clear to you His Signs, that ye may be grateful. (89)

Spoiler

And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allâh enriches them of His Bounty. <b>And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allâh which He has bestowed upon you.</b> And force not your maids to prostitution, if they desire chastity, in order that you may make a gain in the (perishable) goods of this worldly life. But if anyone compels them (to prostitution), then after such compulsion, Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to those women, i.e. He will forgive them because they have been forced to do this evil act unwillingly). (33)

Spoiler

The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and <b>to free the slaves</b> and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise. (60)

Spoiler

It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and <b>to set slaves free</b>; and observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are they who are sincere. Such are the God-fearing. (177)

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Where does it also state that those slaves must be slaves you brought with you on conversion?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was an example of how a Muslim could have gotten possession of them.

<!--quoteo(post=3724149:date=Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM:name=TrolleyDave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TrolleyDave @ Jun 18 2011, 08:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3724149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Those verses clearly show that owning a slave is acceptable. If owning a slave was unacceptable it also wouldn't mention sex with slaves as being Halal, it would clearly state that they were considered Haram. And just think of how much quicker slavery in Arabia would have disappeared if he had just said that.

I know that phrase can have other meanings, but in the context of these verses it's slave. The tafsirs all agree on this.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Qu'ran clearly states that captive women are lawful for sex.

Spoiler

Quran 33:50 - "O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful."

<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It just means that you can have sex with slaves and prisoners of war. But the condition for sex is and always was: marriage. Which requires the consent of both parties. So if a captive wants to marry him, it is ok.

 

[cwstjdenobs]

A person who truly believes and has submitted his will to God cannot hurt another living being. He won't steal and will try his best not to lie. Someone who claims to be Muslim but doesn't follow these basic and clear commandments is not Muslim.

Prison statistics and the 4 times greater amount of Muslims in the prison system than the general population would disagree with you. Many would say they are true Muslims. Many would also say they haven't done anything wrong because they didn't target other Muslims, or what they have done isn't against Islamic law. It's all in your interpretation.

 

[BobTheJoeBob]

A person who truly believes and has submitted his will to God cannot hurt another living being. He won't steal and will try his best not to lie. Someone who claims to be Muslim but doesn't follow these basic and clear commandments is not Muslim.

Prison statistics and the 4 times greater amount of Muslims in the prison system than the general population would disagree with you. Many would say they are true Muslims. Many would also say they haven't done anything wrong because they didn't target other Muslims, or what they have done isn't against Islamic law. It's all in your interpretation.

If they've killed innocent people, they're not following the Qur'an. If they steal, they're not following the Qur'an.
It doesn't matter how many muslims are in the prison system. If you follow the rules set out to the best of your ability, you're a good muslim, it's as simple as that.

 

[cwstjdenobs]

If they've killed innocent people, they're not following the Qur'an. If they steal, they're not following the Qur'an.
It doesn't matter how many muslims are in the prison system. If you follow the rules set out to the best of your ability, you're a good muslim, it's as simple as that.

But they would pick and choose choice quotes to back up their own interpretation, as you will for your interpretation. The prohibitions against killing and stealing can be interpreted as only within your own "tribe" within all the Abrahamic religions.

EDIT: Also the whole concept of taqiya, and the habit of leaving things out of English translations of the Koran makes it a bit hard to trust someone who will not admit there is anything even slightly dubious in the Koran. Also I think this is the perfect example of it all being in the interpretation http://youtu.be/kOOQtMgLB3M

EDIT the second: Yes, before you say it I know there are interpretations that deny the whole idea of taqiyya too.

 

[TrolleyDave]

<!--quoteo(post=3725142:date=Jun 19 2011, 03:01 PM:name=bsfmtl123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bsfmtl123 @ Jun 19 2011, 03:01 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3725142"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*snipped out stuff about Polygamy for space<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I know Islam didn't invent polygamy. Using that line of defence is no different than saying "Well Islam might say this but look at what Christianity says". I really couldn't care less. Does Christianity still allow polygamy?

You're also repeating yourself. I've already agreed to everything you're saying. It has absolutely nothing to do with the point I'm making. The point I'm making is that this rule shows inequality towards women. The statistics have changed now. In many countries men outnumber women. If men are allowed to marry multiple wives in those circumstances then really shouldn't it be fair that women can have multiple husbands in the same circumstances? No provision was put in for this because the Qu'ran erringly believed that women would always outnumber men.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No a Prophet cannot change any rule according to his will.This is what you believe about Muhammad(S.A.W) but the Quran itself states,
"Nor does he say anything of his own desire.It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him."(Surah An-Najm)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

In your rush to defend Mohammed you've completely overlooked the point. The point I'm making is that there has to be a prophet to speak for God. Wihtout a prophet to speak for God then God can not change any of the rules/laws. God doesn't speak directly to people (not since the Old Testament), even Mohammed wasn't spoken to directly by God.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*snipped out videos for space<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've already seen those videos. The only people they'll convince are people who are already believers. They're not for convincing, they're for reassuring.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->By following the Quran and the example of the Holy Prophet(S.A.W).I follow the Holy Prophet(S.A.W) in not every aspect because it's not possible to cover every aspect at the age of 16 but as far as my knowledge exceeds I always follow his example.No, never! i always stay on to the pure Islamic principals not any other teachings(ex: shia).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Are you following Mohammed according to the teachings of the companions? Or according to the writings of Ibn Kathr or Al-Jalalayn? Or are you following modern interpretations of Islam like Pyrmon? Remember to follow true Islam you need to follow what Mohammed taught, and to know what Mohammed taught you have to get closer to his time - not further away.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->When and where did Muhammad(S.A.W) rode topless?Please quote any verse which says men are allowed to bare their stomachs.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I never used to keep records of these things (I have started doing it only recently) and can't find the Hadith I'm particularly thinking of, however I did find these showing Mohammed baring his stomach/abdomen and his thigh.

Spoiler

Sahih Muslim 19:4442 - "It has been reported on the authority of Barra' who said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) was carrying the earth with us on the Day of Ahzab and the whiteness of his belly had been covered with earth. (While engaged in this toil) he was reciting: By God, if Thou hadst not guided us We would have neither been guided aright nor practised charity, Nor offered prayers. Descend on us peace and tranquillity. Behold I these people (the Meccans) refused to follow us. According to another version, he recited: The chieftains (of the tribes) refused to follow us When they contemplated mischief, we rejected it. And with this (verse) he would raise his voice."

Sahih Bukhari 4:52:90 - "Narrated Al-Bara: On the day (of the battle) of Al-Ahzab (i.e. clans) I saw the Prophet carrying earth, and the earth was covering the whiteness of his abdomen. And he was saying, "Without You (O Allah!) we would have got no guidance, nor given in charity, nor prayed. So please bless us with tranquility and make firm our feet when we meet our enemies. Indeed (these) people have rebelled against (oppressed) us but never shall we yield if they try to bring affliction upon us.""

Sahih Bukhari 9:90:342 - "Narrated Al-Bara' bin 'Azib: The Prophet was carrying earth with us on the day of the battle of Al-Ahzab (confederates) and I saw that the dust was covering the whiteness of his abdomen, and he (the Prophet ) was saying, "(O Allah) ! Without You, we would not have been guided, nor would we have given in charity, nor would we have prayed. So (O Allah!) please send tranquility (Sakina) upon us as they, (the chiefs of the enemy tribes) have rebelled against us. And if they intend affliction (i.e. want to frighten us and fight against us) then we would not (flee but withstand them). And the Prophet used to raise his voice with it."

Sahih Bukhari 1:8:367 - "Narrated 'Abdul 'Aziz: Anas said, 'When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, 'Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.' He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, 'Muhammad (has come).' (Some of our companions added, "With his army.") We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, 'O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.' The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Allah's Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.' So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.' Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her." Thabit asked Anas, "O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?" He said, "Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her." Anas added, "While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet . So the Prophet was a bridegroom and he said, 'Whoever has anything (food) should bring it.' He spread out a leather sheet (for the food) and some brought dates and others cooking butter. (I think he (Anas) mentioned As-SawTq). So they prepared a dish of Hais (a kind of meal). And that was Walrma (the marriage banquet) of Allah's Apostle .""

Also, here is a website talking about the Islamic dress code for men and women. According to the Shari'a a men need only cover navel/waist to knee. So there's no problem with men showing the abdomen according to it.

<a href="http://www.albalagh.net/food_for_thought/dress.shtml" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.albalagh.net/food_for_thought/dress.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.albalagh.net/food_for_thought/dress.shtml</a></a>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The One which I follow is Allah(the One and Only).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I knew you were going to answer with that. I said to myself when posting my previous response that I should go further into detail.

Yes I know you follow Allah. Allah is the Arabic word for God (although if you dig further into the history of the word you'll see it differently). This is the same god that the Christians and the Jews follow (also known as Yahweh). This particular god was first taught about by Abraham. Therefore it is the Abrahamic god. It's not a Hindu god, a Greek god, an Indian god, a Native American god, a Maori god, a Chinese god, a Japanese god etc. etc.

You might believe that you follow the one and only god, however so do all the other people following their religion. They believe you follow the wrong god just like you believe they follow the wrong god(s). This is also a very good indication that god(s) are man-made. Every ancient culture had their own particular god(s). This is because they saw things in their own particular way according the world around them. Think of it as humans first attempt at science and philosophy. There were other gods long before there was Allah/God/Yahweh. The first known recorded religion was the Sumerian religion, one which the Abrahamic faith borrows from quite extensively. In fact the whole idea in Islam of humans being slaves to their creator comes from the Sumerian religion. The flood myth also comes from the Sumerian religion, although it does have differences. The Sumerians also talk about their god having created the universe, as do the Chinese (Pangu/Jade Emperor), Greeks (Gaia), Hawaiian (Kumulipo) and many more.

Some of them also talk about how the heavens and the Earth were one and then broken apart, long before Islam and the other Judaic faiths came about. Islamic scholars and Muslims have been saying that about the Big Bang being in the Qu'ran long before science talked about it. Well that very same idea was in other religions before Islam. Just as most of the stuff in Islam was already previously talked about by other religions, scholars and just smart people in general.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Of course not.

Prophet Muhammad was an illiterate man who had no formal education in any science, language, religious or secular.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

When it speaks about "unlettered man" in the Qu'ran it doesn't necessarily mean that Mohammed was illiterate, it could just be referring to him having no formal education. I've had little formal education, I never finished school. It however hasn't stopped me learning lots of information since. You don't have to go to a school to learn things. Mohammed was a trader who regularly went on trading expeditions while married to his first wife. There was ample opportunity for him to pick up any information.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Quran speaks about a variety of branches of science like: Astronomy, Embryology, Hydrology, Geology, Sociology, Psychology, Oceanography, Law etc. including lots of scientific statements that were validated only recently and were not known in the time of the prophet.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

All of the stuff that you mentioned was known during the time of Mohammed, most of it long before. Even alot of the laws in the Shari'a. There is very little in the Qu'ran that is original. Study something other than Islam (and information from Islamic scholars) and you'll see this. If you care to post what you think wasn't known or thought of at the time of Mohammed I can show you the evidence that disproves it, including where he got things wrong.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It was not known about prophet Muhammad any scholarly tendencies or achievements until the age of forty (when he received the first verses of Quran). So, how this illiterate man suddenly brings about a book like the Quran including an ideological and religious revolution that changed history?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

He didn't suddenly bring about the Qu'ran tho did he. The Qu'ran wasn't revealed all in one go, it was revealed over the space of 22 years. So Mohammed had plenty of time to speak to others and learn from them. He had amongst his followers doctors, scientists and scholars so there was no problem with learning information from them.

As for how he could write the religious text. He learned Christianity from his Aunt I believe it was, other relatives followed an offshoot of the Abrahamic faith (one that Islam borrows alot from including some of the Shari'a punsihments) and there was also a large Jewish community.

Ideological ideas? That's pretty simple as well. Most of the government ideology came later on in the Qu'ran, when he actually had enough followers to start being considered a power. Alot of the ideas he had actually come from Jewish ideas (social security, zakat, no interest etc), some came from the ideas of people like Plato and many other sources.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), if he authored the Quran, honor the virgin Mary (May Allah be pleased with her), the mother of Jesus (peace be on him) as the best woman over all women on earth over all ages until day of judgment (an honor that even not offered by the bible) while not mentioning his own family members with a single word and even not mentioning any name of them.?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

If he'd have said he wrote he would have been no different than anyone else at the time. He also would have not have been paid attention to by many because of his uneducated status.

Then you also have the fact that he was hoping to get the local Jews and Christians to follow him. If he'd have claimed that he wrote the Qu'ran rather than the Abrahamic god then none of them would have listened to him, let alone follow him. Plus, if the book comes from God then questioning it is blasphemous and could send you to hell (this is even stated in the Qu'ran itself - doubt will send you to hell).

There are many many many many reasons why he said it was from the Abrahamic god rather than himself.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If he had authored the Quran, why he didn't claim this authorship of Quran and consequently gaining higher prestige among his followers who may consider him as a God.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What higher prestige is their than being a prophet of the Abrahamic god? None of his followers would have considered him a god, he would have been thought of as a clever man similar to Plato or Socrates. Plus being a prophet of God gave him more power and authority. People are likely to question a mans authority and decision but not so quick to question a gods authority and decision. Are you willing to question any of the things in the Qu'ran? No ask yourself, if Mohammed claimed authorship of the Qu'ran would you be willing to question any of the things in it?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why he mentioned Quran verses that reprimand him (as that of chapter 33, verse 37 and chapter 80 verses 1-3) if he wrote Quran by himself?.

Source:http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_Quran_the_true_word_of_God<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What about the verses that give him special permissions? And what about the verses that told off his wives (including telling them that God would make Mohammed divorce his wives and give them better ones)? There were plenty of times that God was quick to bestow favours upon him.



<!--hr--><hr title=""/><!--/hr--><b><!--sizeo:1--><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Posts merged<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--></b>

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There treatment is the same as treatment of Non-Muslims(who aren't slaves).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Are non-Muslim slaves allowed to marry?

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't understand what are you trying to say....please re-post it in a bit clearer version.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I can't really break it down any easier than I have. The problem you're having isn't comprehension of the words, it's comprehension of the idea itself. You are taught god says something and to you that's the way it is. I put forward something that goes completely against what god says yet is more logical and right, so you have a problem understanding the idea itself. However I'll try to break it down simpler for you.

You said that if a wife refuses to have sex with her husband that this could cause the man to go out and attack a woman sexually. You said that it would be the wifes fault if this happened.

I said this would in no way be the wifes fault. If the husband went out and attacked a woman because he didn't get sex at home it would be entirely his fault. We as humans have learnt something called self control. The husband who goes out and attacks a woman because his wife refused him sex obviously has no self-control. Therefore it is HIS fault that he attacked a woman, not the wifes fault. He was the one who chose to attack a woman, so the blame rests entirely on him. What the husband should learn to do is control his lust and choose NOT to attack a woman.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Slavery is unjust, immoral and inhumane according to it's general statement or meaning or that practiced by Non-Muslims but it's not the same taking in consideration the description laid by Islam.

You previously said that slaves were like video games and pets but this was not the way they were treated...............to find out this you need to re-read Islamic<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Again, you're missing the point entirely. I have said over and over that treatment means nothing. The idea of a human being owned by another human being is immoral, unjust and inhumane. Not the actual treatment but the actual ownership. You keep presenting them like they are just staff or workers, however staff and workers have the choice to quit there jobs - slaves do not. Mohammed even stated in the Hadith that a runaway slave will go to hell.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And the point you previously raised about wife beating ...........there is no wife beating(according to many scholars it is but this man's point has weight):
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE&feature=relmfu" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE...;feature=relmfu" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqOpkcQwgvE...;feature=relmfu</a></a>
(Allah Knows Best)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

From the Tafsir of al-Jalalayn :

Spoiler

Men are in charge of, they have authority over, women, disciplining them and keeping them in check, because of that with which God has preferred the one over the other, that is, because God has given them the advantage over women, in knowledge, reason, authority and otherwise, and because of what they expend, on them [the women], of their property. Therefore righteous women, among them, are obedient, to their husbands, guarding in the unseen, that is, [guarding] their private parts and otherwise during their spouses’ absence, because of what God has guarded, for them, when He enjoined their male spouses to look after them well. And those you fear may be rebellious, disobedient to you, when such signs appear, admonish them, make them fear God, and share not beds with them, retire to other beds if they manifest such disobedience, and strike them, but not violently, if they refuse to desist [from their rebellion] after leaving them [in separate beds]. If they then obey you, in what is desired from them, do not seek a way against them, a reason to strike them unjustly. God is ever High, Great, so beware of Him, lest He punish you for treating them unjustly.

It clearly states that husbands are allowed to strike their wives for disobedience.

 

[TrolleyDave]

Responses to reasons why I think Mohammed made it up himself.

Spoiler

The very first verses that you quoted about questioning the Prophet(S.A.W) have again been twisted out of context.The Prophet(S.A.W) had always consulted his companions in all matters(such as battle of Trench and Uhud).He always took the views of other people into consideration.

They weren't taken out of context at all. He may have consulted his compnaions in all matters, but ultimately they had to obey and follow him.

This is again a self opinion about Muhammad and the verse.Were u inside Muhammad(S.A.W) or could read his heart and feelings to tell that he was annoyed.

I don't need to read his heart and feelings. The verse states what it does. Do not annoy the prophet. If he was the perfect man and the role model for all time being annoyed by questions shouldn't have been part of his personality.

Let me give you another chapter to go look at objectively. Do you know the reasons behind the chapter Al-Tahrim?

You just quoted verses and gave your view or interpretation of the verse.You didn't even quote one question that was left unanswered.

What does that even have to do with it? The fact of the matter is the verse says not to ask complicated questions. Would you ask Mohammed difficult questions after the revealing of this verse or would you obey God?

This is again a twist of words.Quran clearly states that they were the Mothers of the Faithful.All his wives were a complete guidance for women to follow.They were the women of great knowledge and dignity.Even the Prophet's companions consulted them and learned from them.

It's not a twist of words at all. Why would marrying someone else, some like say Abu Bakr, stop them from being the mothers of the faithful? Why would them getting remarried affect anything at all as long as they married good men?

If Muhammad(S.A.W)'s wives knew his secrets then why would they remain Muslims.They would have told everyone after his death that he wasn't a true Messenger.

Because it gave them power and privilege. Why would a Queen give up her kingdom?

It's not that Allah needs booty.It means to spend the booty in His way(ex:helping poor,widows and orphans).

Why not just use the words "For Allah", why "For Allah and his Messenger"?

For not misbehaving but committing a sin because they were the Mothers of the Faithful.

Misbehaving and sin are the same thing to me. Why should they get punished double though? If they committed a sin and then repented it would be much more valuable as a role than someone who didn't commit sin because they were fearful of being flogged to death.

If he gets caught up,then the people there were fool enough to again believe in him after this verse.....Can you please quote the verse about which the Quran is talking about.

I'll go one better. I'll present you with the Tafsir of Al-Wahidi explaining why the verse was revealed.

(And when We put a revelation in place of (another) revelation…) [16:101-102]. This verse was revealed when the idolaters said: “Muhammad is mocking his Companions; one day he commands them to do something and the next day he forbids them from doing it, or brings instead something which is easier. He is nothing but a calumniator who says things of his own invention”, and so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse and the verse after it.

*snipped out video of Zakir Naik

Once again Zakir Naik doing what he does best, avoiding the issue by talking lots of nonsense about everything other than the subject. Here's an experiment for you to try. Go outside during the sunset and tell me what you see. You'll see the sun setting in the horizon, a horizon that is so distant you can not make out the details. So unless the guy the verse is talking about had telescopic vision then the Sun could not look like it was setting in a muddy pool.

Spoiler

An explained note on Human Embryology in Quran:
<a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm" target="_blank">http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1.htm</a></a>

Here's a suggestion, go to a non-Islamic site to learn about Embryology. Islamic sites have to tell you the Qu'ran is correct because if it's wrong then it can not be the word of the creator of the universe.

Here, try this video. It's a Muslim attempting to debate the validity of the embryology in Qu'ran with someone who is an embryologist.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T5Pm7qLH50[/youtube]

And then follow it with this one.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGm-_etZmWk[/youtube]

*snipped out other claims about scientific miracles

1) The Abrahamic god isn't the only god to have claimed to have created the universe.

2) Islam (or even Judaism) wasn't the first religion to claim that a god had created a "canopy" above us to protect us.

3) The roots of mountains don't actually pin down the crusts of the Earth. Plus, other Greek philosophers proposed the idea that mountains had roots centuries before Islam.

4) Other religions also stated a similar theory to the creation of the universe in Islam that could be interpreted to be talking about the Big Bang.

And none of it corrects the problem that I pointed out about the Sun being on the orbital trajectory as the Moon.

Of course He is capable of all things but it has not been mentioned that which capabilities He uses.
(Allah Knows Best)

So you agree then that the Qu'ran is wrong when it says that it's impossible for God to have a Son? And I noticed you completely skipped over the part about the Qu'ran being wrong about what Christians worship.

Quran has not directly mentioned about dinosaurs but it does give a hint:

That only gives a hint towards dinosaurs being mentioned if you want to read that into it. As Muslims say, context is everything. When not taken out of context this passage is obviously talking about regular animals.

There is no doubt that He is Compassionate.You mentioned about owning another Human being but you did not mention that slave's position in the Society.

As I've explained to you many many many many many times already, I couldn't care what their position in society was. Ownership of another person is immoral, unjust and inhumane. There is no amount of justification you can give to a rational human being with decent morals that will convince him otherwise.

God knows what you will do(for example there are some intelligent students against some weak or dumb students the Teacher would obviously know that which student will be able to pass the Test)

So God knows that you will suffer an eternity of torment and torture beyond your wildest imgination and still allows you to be born. Where's the compassion in that?

He also sent plenty of Messengers for those unbelievers to repent but they did not so He has to be just in treatment with those who believe in Him and those who don't.

How is burning someone in fire for eternity just treatment?

Boiling water is used to describe Hell in the Quran even if it does not mention it there are plenty of other things that it has mentioned:
<a href="http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm" target="_blank">http://www.inter-islam.org/Actions/manners.htm</a></a>

And none of it is anything that wasn't already known at the time.

Does the verse say that the stars were in our solar system and does it mention about the moon being along or leveled with them.......The stars could be above the moon.
I will search on this and try to give you a better explanation.
(Allah Knows Best)

It says the moon is in the midst of the stars. To be in the midst of something it must be surrounded by other things. <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/midst" target="_blank">http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/midst</a>

It also claims that the Sun and the stars are seperate objects. However in reality the Sun is a star. Would the creator of the universe not know this?

Sorry but i have no idea of this and never heard of it(please post the source to it).

Read 33:37 in the Qu'ran. Here is the Tafsir explaining it.

And when (idh is dependent because of [an implied preceding] udhkur, ‘mention [when]’) you said to him to whom God had shown favour, by [guiding him to] Islam, and to whom you [too] had shown favour: by manumitting him — this was Zayd b. Hāritha, who had been a prisoner of war before [the coming of] Islam (in the period of al-jāhiliyya). The Messenger of God (s) purchased him before his call to prophethood, and then manumitted him and adopted him as his son — ‘Retain your wife for yourself and fear God’, before divorcing her. But you had hidden in your heart what God was to disclose, [what] He was to manifest of your love for her and of [the fact] that should Zayd part with her you would marry her, and you feared people, would say, ‘He has married his son’s wife!’, though God is worthier that you should fear Him, in all things, so take her in marriage and do not be concerned with what people say. Zayd subsequently divorced her and her [obligatory] waiting period was completed. God, exalted be He, says: So when Zayd had fulfilled whatever need he had of her, We joined her in marriage to you — the Prophet consummated his marriage with her without [the customary] permission [from her legal guardian] and gratified the Muslims with [a feast of] bread and meat — so that there may not be any restriction for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have fulfilled whatever wish they have of them. And God’s commandment, that which He has decreed, is bound to be realised.

Muhammad(S.A.W) had not married the girl on his own but his friend Abu Bakr wanted him to marry his daughter Aisha.He used to play with Aisha until she had reached puberty and attained maturity.This does set an example for future Muslims but not to marry small children but to marry anyone seeing his virtue and the degree of piety.

I don't know who told you that but it's not the truth.

Sahih Bukhari 7:62:18 - "Narrated 'Ursa:The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage.Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.""

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/062.sbt.html#007.062.018" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#007.062.018</a>

Mohammed says God showed her to him in a dream.

Sahih Bukhari 9:87:140 - "Narrated 'Aisha: Allah's Apostle said to me, "You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, 'Uncover (her),' and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.' Then you were shown to me, the angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said (to him), 'Uncover (her), and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.'""

<a href="http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/087.sbt.html#009.087.140" target="_blank">http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/en...tml#009.087.140</a>

So no, that's not what it was an example of. Now ask yourself this question, why would an all-knowing god tell a prophet to do something that is so immoral? And why would he tell a prophet to do something that he knew would become incredibly distasteful, if not repulsive, to the average man 1400 years later?

It all depends upon a person that how he perceives a thing either negatively or positively.

I most definitely perceive it as negative. I accept that at the time it was culturally acceptable, but it is not something that someone who was to be considered a role model for all mankind for all the ages should do.

A very good site that proves that Muhammad(S.A.W) is not the creator of Islam.
A very well description of all miracles of Islam and Quran:

I've already seen that site several times and each of their claims is complete nonsense.