Are you an atheist?

[John Big Booty]

We are told not to insult other posters but I feel that Aziz insults our intelligence with many of his responses, one simple example is when Galaxiom raised the issue of modesty,

quote from Galaxiom
Yet the woman is directed to cover herself to a far greater extent than a man who is only told to lower his gaze.

What like Muslim men have no head?

...
Brian

My understanding of the reasoning behind the direction that Christian woman
should cover their heads whilst attending Church, is so as not to titillate the cherubs looking down from above (but then aren't they supposed to be sexless Cherub that is)

So WTF is it with female head hair and religion

 

[Galaxiom]

A Muslim country would not allow same gender marriages but people are free to go elsewhere just as I am free to leave a non Muslim country if I am not happy with it's laws.

Yet you claimed there was no prejudice against homosexuality in the Qu'ran. Why is it not permitted then?

I don't think every Australian would agree with same gender marriages as you seem to be suggesting.

I have not suggested all Australians take this position. However it is clear that the majority of Australians share this view. As such the change to the law is just a matter of time.

There are other norms by which people wish to live by and some of these norms are enshrined in Sharia which suggests that even non Muslims independently accept that there are certain rules that we should live by.

Certainly. But these rules do not come from Sharia. Moreover those of us with a developed sense of morality also agree that prejudice against women is not acceptable and hence reject the bigotry of Mohammed and those who wrote the hideous Hebrew tomes.

There is generally still more women to men even today. So the relevance to multiple marriages is just as relevant.

Here you repeat the same fallacy you posted before. I posted a link to statistics that show your assertion is incorrect. Your behaviour is typical of the religious who simply ignore the facts and repeat to their delusions.

After all you have many non Muslim men who have countless illicit affairs even though they are married. In Islam, the marriages would all be legal and in the open. Which is better?

Women also have affairs yet you do not accept that polyandry is just as valid a solution as polygyny. This is because your beliefs are fundamentally prejudiced and irrational.

Nothing that God does is sexist or arbitrary. You are entitled to your view.

The holy texts are nothing but the word of men and are demonstrably sexist.

What woman would marry a man who wasn't working or striving to earn a living to support them? No woman wants to marry a time waster.

Again you exhibit your prejudice. This is entirely a private matter between the couple. I raised the issue because you stated (in your usual bigoted manner) that a man who could not support his wife should not marry. This is objectively sexually prejudiced.

In addition there is no command by Allaah for a woman to marry more than one man anyway so the issue is superfluous.

Again you use your circular logic and a perspective profoundly limited by your obsession with the exaltation of the Qu'ran to justify your prejudice.

A woman has more to cover that's why.

More blatant prejudice. Perhaps you could answer the question on this matter as put to your by Brian.

I had no formal education in Islam as I said unless you accept reading the Qur'an in Arabic, which is a language I don't understand as being exposure.

Exactly as I suggested. You were brought up from birth with the concept that the Qu'ran has special significance whether you could read it or not. I knew this would be case because of your extreme deference to it.

Islam fitted me because it's the TRUTH. I have read other religions at the time I was looking into Islam. In fact I knew more about Christianity than any other religion as I was taught this at primary school. We even had a reverend who came every Friday to indoctrinate us. However it didn't work on me. God has given us a brain to think with.

Your ability to think atrophied long ago. Judaism. Christianity and Islam are all based or rubbish written by primitive, ignorant, arrogant, misogynist men.

On the contrary I have objectively thought about my belief. I don't just accept God as a whim.

Your posts here are littered with circular logic leading back to your obsession with the drivel in the Qu'ran over and over again and show you have zero capacity for objective thinking.

My family left because we had to flee India and were left with nothing so on an economic basis my family came here not to spread the word as I have chosen of course to do.

Your family had to flee India because of religious conflict. Basically the majority of the Indian population grew tired of arrogant Muslims who insisted that Islam is the only valid way to think. Indeed much of the spread of Islam was driven by Arab traders who refused to deal with any who were not Muslims. This is an insidious a form of prejudice and corruption.

Why should you who is supposed to be a democrat resent my voice from being heard particularly when I'm breaking no law?

I don't resent you expressing your views. In fact I applaud it since it exposes the ridiculous nature of your faith for all to see. Please do continue.

 

[aziz rasul]

We are told not to insult other posters but I feel that Aziz insults our intelligence with many of his responses

Brian, you are not a Muslim so whatever I say may sound unintelligent to you. But if you asked a Muslim, they might agree with what I say. So it depends from which direction you are coming from.

The subject of modesty is not rocket science. It is clear with all societies that certain norms of decencies are required and is not a subject that should be difficult to understand. When I said that a woman has more to cover this was natural. After all a woman could not walk about as a man would if he was bare chested. Hence the question of modesty for a woman is more than for a man.

During the Days of Ignorance 14 centuries ago, women used to show their cleavage and would be pestered by men. God asked the believing women to cover themselves up so as to distinguish them from the unbelievers.

024.030 Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and be modest. That is purer for them. Lo! Allah is aware of what they do.

024.031 And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed.

033.059 O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be recognised and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.

When the poor came to the house of the Prophet (peace be upon him) to ask for food, some of them would ask familiar questions to which the Prophet (peace be upon him) disliked.

033.053 O Ye who believe! Enter not the dwellings of the Prophet for a meal without waiting for the proper time, unless permission be granted you. But if ye are invited, enter, and, when your meal is ended, then disperse. Linger not for conversation. Lo! that would cause annoyance to the Prophet, and he would be shy of (asking) you (to go); but Allah is not shy of the truth. And when ye ask of them (the wives of the Prophet) anything, ask it of them from behind a curtain. That is purer for your hearts and for their hearts. And it is not for you to cause annoyance to the messenger of Allah, nor that ye should ever marry his wives after him. Lo! that in Allah's sight would be an enormity.

Mary (peace be upon her) also covered herself in the way that God says in the Qur'an.

We see Christian nuns covering themselves in the same way. So not just confined to Islam.

All people were commanded by God to cover themselves.

007.026 O Children of Adam! We have revealed unto you raiment to conceal your shame, and splendid vesture, but the raiment of restraint from evil, that is best. This is of the revelations of Allah, that they may remember.

Actually I could not find in the Qu'ran the passage saying that women had to cover their heads and faces, perhaps Aziz can quote it for us and explain why.

The Arabic word jilbaab is used in the Qur'an which is a covering from the head to the feet. The hair is not specifically mentioned. A woman's hair is a part of a woman's zeenat (beauty) and therefore is covered with the jilbaab.

What about the question I asked about how you regard Allah, as a father or a master, perhaps neither just God.

God does not have gender. He is unique and has always existed and will always exist. He has no beginning and has no end. We on the other hand have a beginning when our souls were created and we do not have an end as we shall live forever whether that is in paradise (janat) or hell fire (jahanum) depending on our actions.

On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:

"Allah Almighty has said:
'The son of Adam denied Me and he had no right to do so. And he reviled Me and he had no right to do so. As for his denying Me, it is his saying: 'He will not remake me as He made me at first' (1) - and the initial creation [of him] is no easier for Me than remaking him. As for his reviling Me, it is his saying: 'Allah has taken to Himself a son,' while I am the One, the Everlasting Refuge. I begot not nor was I begotten, and there is none comparable to Me.'" Hadith Qudsi 2

Even if you did read texts literally "God the Father" ...

Jesus (peace be upon him) is referred to as the son of David (peace be upon him) in the NT. We don't read this verses literally but it can be read as a spiritual connection i.e. they were both on the path of Islam. They are of course connected genetically as well.

Yet you claimed there was no prejudice against homosexuality in the Qu'ran. Why is it not permitted then?

It is not permitted to indulge in homosexuality openly where there are 4 witnesses. What homosexuals (or indeed hetrosexuals) do in private is not for people to punish but for God to punish as He wishes.

On the authority of Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) say:

"Allah the Almighty said:
'O son of Adam, so long as you call upon Me and ask of Me, I shall forgive you for what you have done, and I shall not mind. O son of Adam, were your sins to reach the clouds of the sky and were you then to ask forgiveness of Me, I would forgive you. O son of Adam, were you to come to Me with sins nearly as great as the earth and were you then to face Me, ascribing no partner to Me, I would bring you forgiveness nearly as great as it.'" Hadith Qudsi 34

reject the bigotry of Mohammed and those who wrote the hideous Hebrew tomes.

How about giving us some evidence?

033.057 Lo! those who malign Allah and His messenger, Allah hath cursed them in the world and the Hereafter, and hath prepared for them the doom of the disdained.

Here you repeat the same fallacy you posted before. I posted a link to statistics that show your assertion is incorrect. Your behaviour is typical of the religious who simply ignore the facts and repeat to their delusions.

I am entitled to my views much as you dislike it.

Again you exhibit your prejudice. This is entirely a private matter between the couple. I raised the issue because you stated (in your usual bigoted manner) that a man who could not support his wife should not marry. This is objectively sexually prejudiced.

There is no couple as you put it. A man can only marry when he has the means. Only then you can refer to them as a couple, not before.

Exactly as I suggested. You were brought up from birth with the concept that the Qu'ran has special significance whether you could read it or not. I knew this would be case because of your extreme deference to it.

My love and deference for the Qur'an, much as you may dislike it, is based on what it says by reflection not blindness.

016.044 With clear proofs and writings; and We have revealed unto thee the Remembrance that thou mayst explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them, and that haply they may reflect.

Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other than God they would surely have found therein much discrepancy. 4:82

067.006 And for those who disbelieve in their Lord there is the doom of hell, a hapless journey's end!

067.007 When they are flung therein they hear its roaring as it boileth up,

067.008 As it would burst with rage. Whenever a (fresh) host is flung therein the wardens thereof ask them: Came there unto you no warner ?

067.009 They say: Yea, verily, a warner came unto us; but we denied and said: Allah hath naught revealed; ye are in naught but a great error.

067.010 And they say: Had we been wont to listen or have sense, we had not been among the dwellers in the flames.

067.011 So they acknowledge their sins; but far removed (from mercy) are the dwellers in the flames.

067.012 Lo! those who fear their Lord in secret, theirs will be forgiveness and a great reward.

109.006 Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.

... it exposes the ridiculous nature of your faith for all to see.

In your opinion.

Happy Ramadhan to all Muslims. May this blessed month bring us closer to our Creator.

 

[Libre]

I'm an atheist.
I'm always open to modify my beliefs or just change my mind in the light of new information or discoveries.
So now, let me see.
It is said that God created man in his own image.
It is far more plausible that the reverse is true.
Nobody really KNOWS.
Nobody alive, anyway.
Let me ask a question.
If there is a God who created us, and the rest of the universe too, then why is everything so intricate? Why are there microscopic structures in our body?
Why do we have a pancreas, a heart, or any other organ?
We could just be filled with stuffing.
But we're not.
Every feature, every process has to work.
When they study it enough and figure out what and why, and understand the function, it all becomes clear.
Our heart pumps blood, but who needs blood?
We do because we're corporeal creatures - organisms - not "creations".
The blood performs a necessary function, which would be unnecessary if we were just a construction of a super-being.
Oh, I forgot you aren't supposed to question God's ways.
Well, seems to me he built a lot of incredibly complex stuff that with enough study can be understood and explained by science, when he could have simply breathed life into Adam as the Bible would have us believe. We could all be mannequins without any internal organs, now could't we? No we could not - because we're organisms. We have cells, mitochondria, DNA, and Isles of Langerhans to manufacture insulin - which would be unnecessary, of course, if we were a God's manifestation instead of sophisticated creatures that EVOLVED from simpler organisms.
The Biblical explanation of the universe was fine when there was no understanding of nature or physics, but now that we've had Newton and Darwin, Bernoulli and Pascal, Gauss and Tesla, Maxwell and Hertz, Freud and Einstein (et al), well, now we know a thing or two and the Biblical explanation is terribly insufficient to explain anything, whilst these incredible geniuses have explained - if not everything - then a whole hell of a lot. And if we were to just ignore all their discoveries and say - God made it all with a snap of the fingers - then I guess they lived for nothing.

 

[Brianwarnock]

Aziz

I asked about the covering of head and hair as I could not find it mentioned in qu'ran , you could not either infact saying that it was not specifically mentioned, the passages you quoted were those that I found and I have no argument with their general philosophy, but it is obvious that the covering of the face and hair is not ordered by the qu'ran, so even if the qu'ran was the word of God the decision to force women to cover themselves above the shoulders is by men.

Brian

 

[Brianwarnock]

On the subject of the man being the provider and that he should not marry unless he can provide, both of my daughters earn considerably more than their partners, one well qualified over twice as much, the others husband had to give up his job due to a disabling condition and now earns far less as a care worker involving long hours for a low wage. All are happy but presumably they should separate according to your laws.

Brian

 

[G37Sam]

A very wise scholar once said:

"Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one and it's fine to be proud of it, but please don't whip it out in public and start waving it around... and PLEASE don't try to shove it down my child's throat."

 

[Lightwave]

Aziz can I ask if Muslim girls wanted to take part in Triathlons or outside sport would it be allowed by their beliefs to forego covering in order to take part in sporting events.

While head coverings in some sports could be worn in others it is not very practical and possibly a hindrance.

I saw a girl jogging the other day with a head covering. It must be a hindrance. And in Triathlons it is not really possible until they are out of the swim and on the bike / run. Plus it could obscure vision although I guess if there was enough demand you might get a sports burkha.

 

[Galaxiom]

Brian, you are not a Muslim so whatever I say may sound unintelligent to you. But if you asked a Muslim, they might agree with what I say. So it depends from which direction you are coming from.

If you start with the assumption that the Qu'ran is the word of God, anything that contradicts it can be ignored. However what you say is still not intelligent because it contradicts the facts.

For example you claimed that polygyny is justified by the excess of men over women. I linked to official statistics which unambiguously showed the basis of your claim was incorrect. There is no excess of women in the marriageable demographic.

You then repeated the same false claim which I again pointed out was incorrect. And your latest reply:

I am entitled to my views much as you dislike it.

You are entitled to your view even though it contradicts the observed facts. I also believe I am entitled to consider that you are, quite objectively, stupid and ignorant to hold this view since it is contrary to the facts.

As has been repeatedly pointed out, a religious faith is an irrational point of view which, far from being the basis of an good way to live, is actually nothing more than institutionalised ignorance and bigotry.

The subject of modesty is not rocket science. It is clear with all societies that certain norms of decencies are required and is not a subject that should be difficult to understand. When I said that a woman has more to cover this was natural. After all a woman could not walk about as a man would if he was bare chested. Hence the question of modesty for a woman is more than for a man.

Your presumption that it is "natural" for a women to cover more, particularly "head to foot" is a fallacy. Both men and women in many cultures in Africa, North and South America, Australia, New Guinea and the Pacific Islands lived almost naked and in some places they still do. Bare breasted women is quite natural.

The only basis for your position is your book from which you will no doubt again copiously quote in what you consider is a "response".

During the Days of Ignorance 14 centuries ago, women used to show their cleavage and would be pestered by men.

So Mohammed and his like decided in their "wisdom" that the problem is the woman (as usual). In an intelligent society with a reasoned morality we realise that the problem is not with the women but the attitude of the men.

Unfortunately adherents to the primitive misogynist idology of the Abrahamic religions, have elevated this prejudice to a point where they are more than happy to oblige with proof that women who are not completely covered are vulnerable to sexual assault. Then they and others blame the woman for displeasing Allah.

In fact the psychopathic attitude to women and sexuality displayed by the authors of the holy books underpins the dysfunction observed in men in the societies inhabited by the followers of this twisted philosophy.

God asked the believing women to cover themselves up so as to distinguish them from the unbelievers.

As I keep telling you, it is obvious that not a God but ancient, ignorant, misogynist men wrote those books. However your sentence does allude to the real reason these men included that direction. Women not dressed to their satisfaction were considered to be of the enemy and were hence fair game for ra** as a reward in battle.

You continue to reveal the extraordinary depth of your bigotry and arrogance when you respond to my posting that the financial business of a couple is their own private business.

There is no couple as you put it. A man can only marry when he has the means. Only then you can refer to them as a couple, not before.

 

[aziz rasul]

Brian, did you not read the explanation regarding the jilbaab that I gave? The covering of the face and hands is not given in the Qur'an.

On the subject of the man being the provider and that he should not marry unless he can provide, both of my daughters earn considerably more than their partners, one well qualified over twice as much, the others husband had to give up his job due to a disabling condition and now earns far less as a care worker involving long hours for a low wage. All are happy but presumably they should separate according to your laws.

I said that a man could not marry until he can provide food, clothing and shelter. The same situation does not apply once you are married if for genuine reasons the husband is unable to meet these demands. There was no indication in my post where anyone would separate as you put it. I think you are inferring something that was not given in my post. You could have asked the question what would happen if a husband was unable to meet these demands during his life as a husband\father.

The fact that a woman may be earning more than her husband does not mean that the husband necessarily can't provide the three articles I mentioned above. The wife can voluntarily add her earnings to the pot if she wishes but it cannot be taken from her by force. The wife can also give a loan (without any interest) to her husband and waive it if the situation is such that her husband cannot repay it. In the extreme case where a man is unable to provide at all due to say illness then of course the wife can take over the role of the bread winner.

Similarly any inheritance that a woman receives is hers alone to do as she wishes whilst any inheritamce that a man receives is normally used for the family. That is why a man receives 2 shares and a woman receives 1 share as the man's financial responsibility is greater. People often say this is unjust but fail to obtain the reasons behind it.

 

[aziz rasul]

Aziz can I ask if Muslim girls wanted to take part in Triathlons or outside sport would it be allowed by their beliefs to forego covering in order to take part in sporting events.

A Muslim woman can involve themselves in sport providing that they are following the rules of modesty. It would be non sensical for a woman who has reached the age of puberty and be asked to cover herself in a modest way and then say that the rules change when they indulge in sport or whatever it happens to be. For example a Muslim woman can go swimming in a swimming pool with other woman providing there are no men present. That is why some sports centres allow specific woman only sessions. I'm sure that non Muslim woman may also feel comfortable with this as there are no prying male eyes. After all, why do we insist on separate female and male wards in hospitals?

If a Muslim woman wants to indulge in any sport where she would have to compromise her Islamic faith, then the Islamic faith must first. This also applies to men.

I saw a girl jogging the other day with a head covering. It must be a hindrance.

In your opinion. I have often seen men jogging with a hoody on.

 

[aziz rasul]

Galaxiom, you can always say that in a particular time and place there may be more men than women or an equal amount but generally speaking that has not historically been the case as I said due to man made wars. If you look at the end of the world wars there were more women to men. Therefore on a general level what I am saying is correct based on my facts. If you want to disgree then that's fine. As I said you are entitled to your opinion according to the facts you are giving but I am right according to the facts I am presenting and therefore there is no contradiction as far as I am concerned.

Say: O Allah! Creator of the heavens and the earth! Knower of the Invisible and the Visible! Thou wilt judge between Thy slaves concerning that wherein they used to differ. 039.046

As has been repeatedly pointed out, a religious faith is an irrational point of view which, far from being the basis of an good way to live, is actually nothing more than institutionalised ignorance and bigotry.

You cannot undermine me buy using such language. I will express my opinion much as you dislike it.

Your presumption that it is "natural" for a women to cover more, particularly "head to foot" is a fallacy. Both men and women in many cultures in Africa, North and South America, Australia, New Guinea and the Pacific Islands lived almost naked and in some places they still do. Bare breasted women is quite natural.

So why in the western world woman are not allowed to go about in public bare chested on a hot day? In the countries you mentioned, if Muslim woman went about bare chested they would be committing a sin.

The only basis for your position is your book from which you will no doubt again copiously quote in what you consider is a "response".

Hmmm, seems that quoting from the Qur’an somehow irks you. Well here’s other verses for you to reflect on.

Lo! We have revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture for mankind with truth. Then whosoever goeth right it is for his soul, and whosoever strayeth, strayeth only to its hurt. And thou art not a warder over them. 039.041

Say: O My bondmen who believe! Observe your duty to your Lord. For those who do good in this world there is good, and Allah's earth is spacious. Verily the steadfast will be paid their wages without stint. 39.010

Is he whose bosom Allah hath expanded for Al-Islam, so that he followeth a light from his Lord, (as he who disbelieveth)? Then woe unto those whose hearts are hardened against remembrance of Allah. Such are in plain error. 39.022

So Mohammed and his like decided in their "wisdom" that the problem is the woman (as usual). In an intelligent society with a reasoned morality we realise that the problem is not with the women but the attitude of the men.

The commands come from God. Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) simply enacted the commands of God.

The reason why men and women are asked to cover themselves up in public is so that neither gender is mentally corrupted.

Unfortunately adherents to the primitive misogynist idology of the Abrahamic religions, have elevated this prejudice to a point where they are more than happy to oblige with proof that women who are not completely covered are vulnerable to sexual assault. Then they and others blame the woman for displeasing Allah.

A woman is not necessarily going to be sexually assaulted, but can be verbally hindered. We see that in western societies. Again you go to the wrong end of the discussion by your incorrect assumptions when you talk about woman displeasing Allaah. The rules are there so that society can live in a decent way. Why in the UK recently have the UK government been talking about the harm that porn is having on people? Do western men not find it objectionable when some strange man ogles his wife|sister etc. in public?

As I keep telling you, it is obvious that not a God but ancient, ignorant, misogynist men wrote those books. However your sentence does allude to the real reason these men included that direction.

040.035 Those who wrangle concerning the revelations of Allah without any warrant that hath come unto them, it is greatly hateful in the sight of Allah and in the sight of those who believe. Thus doth Allah print on every arrogant, disdainful heart.

Women not dressed to their satisfaction were considered to be of the enemy and were hence fair game for ra** as a reward in battle.

What have you been drinking?

You continue to reveal the extraordinary depth of your bigotry and arrogance when you respond to my posting that the financial business of a couple is their own private business.

Me thinks that you were still drunk when you wrote this. Why, in general, should the financial affairs of a married couple not be there own private business? If a couple require help, then of course they can ask for it as we Muslims can give zakah (charity) to each other as and when required, but in general there financial affairs is there business.

 

[aziz rasul]

003.016 Those who say: Our Lord! Lo! we believe. So forgive us our sins and guard us from the punishment of Fire;

003.017 The steadfast, and the truthful, and the obedient, those who spend (and hoard not), those who pray for pardon in the watches of the night.

003.018 Allah (Himself) is Witness that there is no God save Him. And the angels and the men of learning (too are witness). Maintaining His creation in justice, there is no God save Him the Almighty, the Wise.

003.019 Lo! religion with Allah (is) the Surrender (to His Will and Guidance). Those who (formerly) received the Scripture differed only after knowledge came unto them, through transgression among themselves. Whoso disbelieveth the revelations of Allah (will find that) lo! Allah is swift at reckoning.

003.020 And if they argue with thee, (O Muhammad), say: I have surrendered my purpose to Allah and (so have) those who follow me. And say unto those who have received the Scripture and those who read not: Have ye (too) surrendered? If they surrender, then truly they are rightly guided, and if they turn away, then it is thy duty only to convey the message (unto them). Allah is Seer of (His) bondmen.

003.021 Lo! those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, and slay the prophets wrongfully, and slay those of mankind who enjoin equity: promise them a painful doom.

003.022 Those are they whose works have failed in the world and the Hereafter; and they have no helpers.

 

[Rabbie]

003.016 Those who say: Our Lord! Lo! we believe. So forgive us our sins and guard us from the punishment of Fire;

003.017 The steadfast, and the truthful, and the obedient, those who spend (and hoard not), those who pray for pardon in the watches of the night.

003.018 Allah (Himself) is Witness that there is no God save Him. And the angels and the men of learning (too are witness). Maintaining His creation in justice, there is no God save Him the Almighty, the Wise.

003.019 Lo! religion with Allah (is) the Surrender (to His Will and Guidance). Those who (formerly) received the Scripture differed only after knowledge came unto them, through transgression among themselves. Whoso disbelieveth the revelations of Allah (will find that) lo! Allah is swift at reckoning.

003.020 And if they argue with thee, (O Muhammad), say: I have surrendered my purpose to Allah and (so have) those who follow me. And say unto those who have received the Scripture and those who read not: Have ye (too) surrendered? If they surrender, then truly they are rightly guided, and if they turn away, then it is thy duty only to convey the message (unto them). Allah is Seer of (His) bondmen.

003.021 Lo! those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, and slay the prophets wrongfully, and slay those of mankind who enjoin equity: promise them a painful doom.

003.022 Those are they whose works have failed in the world and the Hereafter; and they have no helpers.

And your point is???

 

[G37Sam]

Aziz, you can't make references and quotes from the Holy Qura'an until you've established that it's a common credible source to everyone on here. In which case it isn't.

Bottom line is, religion and logic will never go hand in hand, and as a Muslim, you're requested to obey and not question aka "Having Faith".

 

[Lightwave]

In your opinion. I have often seen men jogging with a hoody on.

Aziz thanks for answering.

I suspect however you don't run much.

In my town people running in hoodies are the ones distancing themselves from the scene of a crime.

 

[Galaxiom]

I said that a man could not marry until he can provide food, clothing and shelter. The same situation does not apply once you are married if for genuine reasons the husband is unable to meet these demands. There was no indication in my post where anyone would separate as you put it. I think you are inferring something that was not given in my post. You could have asked the question what would happen if a husband was unable to meet these demands during his life as a husband\father.

You made it perfectly clear that under Islam there "is no couple" unless the man can meet this artificial demand. You spell out how the woman can loan money to the man and who gets what. Indeed you insult many couples with this assertion, including me and my wife.

Quite frankly financial arrangements of a couple are absolutely no business of anyone else. The decree by the church that they cannot marry is just another fascist facet of your bigoted doctrine.

 

[aziz rasul]

And your point is???

As a believer in God, I thought I would include the chosen verses into the mix.
Who knows, someone reading the verses may incline towards the TRUTH who have not done so already, insha-allaah and be saved from torment for eternity. That someone can go back to the poll and say they believe in God.

Aziz, you can't make references and quotes from the Holy Qur'an until you've established that it's a common credible source to everyone on here. In which case it isn't.

I placed many Qur’anic verses in this thread to show that the Qur’an could not be the work of man as the verses talk about science which was unknown at the time of revelation. For example it was in the 1920’s that Alexander Freidmann (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/universes/html/univ_fried.html) who first came up with the idea of how the universe could have been created using the science of Mathematics. Edwin Hubble was able to subsequently show that we had an expanding universe using Physical science. How, if man or men wrote the Qur’an 14 centuries ago, did man come to this knowledge?

Bottom line is, religion and logic will never go hand in hand, and as a Muslim, you're requested to obey and not question aka "Having Faith".

I can give you many examples of where religion and logic do go hand in hand. As a Muslim I obey God after having established that God exists. So it’s not blind obedience as you seem to be suggesting. There are Muslims who would do just that, but that is normally because they may not be educated enough in Islam to conclusively believe in God in comparison to those Muslims who have reflected|pondered|reasoned their way to belief.

I suspect however you don't run much.

In my town people running in hoodies are the ones distancing themselves from the scene of a crime.

Not anymore but I was young once so I know that it’s not a hindrance. If a Muslim woman wears a hijab (head scarf), I don’t quite see why this would be a hindrance to her whilst she is jogging! It seems to me that such comments show an underlying pettiness towards Muslim woman for no good reason. It’s no wonder that Muslim woman living in the west feel that they are constantly under attack by non-Muslims. They have my heartfelt sympathies.

You made it perfectly clear that under Islam there "is no couple" unless the man can meet this artificial demand.

What’s artificial about it? Surely these are things (food, clothing, shelter) we need to survive on! In the west I hear on many occasions when a man is rebuked if he does not go out and earn for his family when he has no obstacles. There is absolutely nothing artificial about it all as these are things by which the western societies also live by. How many parents would be happy for their daughter to marry a man who is unable to meet these important articles? How many western woman would want to marry a man who is unable to support her?

In Islam, there is no free mixing of men and women, which is why the issue of a couple doesn’t come into the picture.

You spell out how the woman can loan money to the man and who gets what. Indeed you insult many couples with this assertion, including me and my wife.

What she gets is the reward for helping her husband. Life as a Muslim is not just what you get here in this life but what you take forward in the hereafter. I don’t quite understand why you would be insulted!!! If a woman wishes to help her husband when he has fallen through hard times, what’s so insulting about that? For someone who throws a lot of insults about, you seem particularly sensitive about something where no insult was even given!!! Go figure.

Quite frankly financial arrangements of a couple are absolutely no business of anyone else.

But that’s what I said in my last post. Whatever the financial issues a married couple have is their own business. Don’t understand what your objection is as you seem to be agreeing with me?

The decree by the church that they cannot marry is just another fascist facet of your bigoted doctrine.

There is no church in Islam. We have Masjids. So you’re mixing your establishments a bit. A church represents that which diagrammatically opposite to Islam. As you’re not a Muslim, most things about Islam will seem abhorrent to you. That, I’m afraid is your problem. It does not affect my faith one iota or indeed the Islamic faith of other Muslims.

 

[rodmc]

Aziz thanks for answering.

I suspect however you don't run much.

In my town people running in hoodies are the ones distancing themselves from the scene of a crime.

pmsl So true!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Adam Caramon]

How, if man or men wrote the Qur’an 14 centuries ago, did man come to this knowledge?

Huh? That doesn't make any sense.

As a Muslim I obey God after having established that God exists. So it’s not blind obedience as you seem to be suggesting.

All those blindly obedient believe this. If you cannot give an example of something that could occur that would prove to you that Islam is false, then your are blindly obedient.