The Faith & Religion mega Thread

I think you're all wasting your time trying to have a rational debate with someone whose beliefs belong in the Dark Ages.

Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul Why isn't there a clause in Quran that keeping slaves is totally against Allah's wishes (on the humanitarian grounds) and people should IMMEDIATELY free all the slaves? If Allah CAN enforce the following clause IMMEDIATELY, why didn't he enforce the same condition for people who kept slaves too?

I dont know why Allah didnt say exactly so. But note Slavery is not been encouraged in Islam, rather it was acknowledged and regulated. Perhaps you missed my previous posts. I said Mohammed and his companion set several slaves free in his time. You are raising issue which has no meaning in current word. Where is the slavery now a days?

Have a look what is Islamic view on this topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_slavery


I believe those time slaves are same like prisoners in current world. If you have knowledge, perhaps there is no country who has rule to free its prisoners. I hope you know now what Allah said how to treat with your slaves (prisoners), and i am sure you must have seen the link I post previously. If not here is again you can look once again, how the great civilized country is treating with their prisoners. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghr...prisoner_abuse

Citations or it never happened. And Citations should be outside Quran (if you want further discussions). Otherwise you have an opportunity to say that these are your BELIEFS ONLY.

You can google. You will find several references. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran
If you want scientific proof like few atheists here, sorry there wont be any.

Perhaps I should have made it clear that I was referring to the following verses: Are these quotes not the permissions for rape? and there are more similar verses, there, if you pay attention.

First of all what ever you quoted they are not part of Quran. They are part of Hadith. Just for your information Hadith is not sent by Allah. It was written by Mohammed companions what ever they used to see around. Generally there is no conflict between Hadith and Quran. If any, Quran is given higher preference to resolve the issue. Hadith rules are not compulsory, they are optional at your choice. For example: Mohammed used to keep beard. This is in hadith. Its optional, not compulsion.

Coming back to your question, whatever hadiths we are seeing in that link either prophet is totally refusing or he is allowing. In you view his allowing for rape. Well lady you are misleading here. He is allowing but in lawful manner. In Islam before having intercourse person has to marry. There is no exception to this rule. And in Islamic marriage both man and women permission is sought. This is compulsory. There should not be any kind of force. There are witnesses from both parties. This is basic law of Islamic marriage. If Prophet has allowed them, it means man supposed to marry them with condition they are not married already and they were under same master (right hand possesses). They could marry only max 4 one after another. They were allowed to marry more than one if they could do proper justice to everyone. Justice means giving all equal rights and time to each of his wives (and many more). You must have notice here, with this slaves are becoming wives, not public property nor still as slaves. Means their social status is improved. Was it bad?

Dont let me tell you again and again, Rape is a great sin in Islam. Just apply your own logic, when rape is not at all allowed in religion how come Allah or Prophet can allow?????

and also what explanation you have for the clause which says wives have no right to say a no, if they are not willing to have sex with their husbands?

This is not in Quran nor in Hadith. Its one of fatwa issued by some mufti. Its upto you follow or not. In practical fatwa's are going really out of control. Authorities are issuing fatwa just like anything. Hope we will have some kind of control over them in future.

Firstly, pointing fingers at other religions just to defend your own, is pathetic. I already know the facts about Hinduism (religion), if the man is allowed to have many wives, so are the women allowed to have many husbands, example: Draupadi. Well, anyways, giving you the benefit of doubt that you haven't understood the question properly, here I go again: The question wasn't that why polygamy is permitted or not permitted, the question was, why the women aren't given the equal rights for keeping many husbands? Is it clear now?

I didn't pointed finger at any religion. I can do that what others are doing here since day one, but i will not. My religion dont allow me to do that. I just gave references what other religions are saying about this topic. Tell me one thing other than draupdi, do you have any other example specially in current world scenario, any of your friend, relative, your neighbor....? I am sure you wont find single one.

In Islam women is treated equal to man. They may not have same rights, simply because physical, nature wise they are not equal. For example Islam does not encourage women to go out and work, but same time does not restrict also. Women are been for raising children and maintaining the home. This is what they are good at. Our country culture also up to some extends supports that. Now its changing because of west culture we started following and you can see the result. Rapes, Harassment, illegal relationships, family tensions, divorces are on peak.

Why women is not allowed to marry more men.

Well to be frank I was not expecting this question from you.

Assume if a woman has 2 husbands and she becomes pregnant. How to decide who is his father? Both will say its mine. Or what if both says its not mine? How a lady can maintain 2 different houses same time?

In Islam a man can marry a divorced or widow women, only if she has passed her iddat time of 40 days (atleast one monthly period). You might have noticed this line "if she is pure".... This is to avoid confusion who is the father if she becomes pregnant. I hope there will be even more serious practical problems with this.

I hope this will answer your question.

I thought we were discussing here the religion and the holy books, and not the constitution of India or the activities of the "mere mortals"? But if you are bent on discussing the acts of "mere mortals", let me tell you that 1. It were Muslims terrorists who raped my neighbors in Kashmir. 2. It were Muslims terrorists who burned our two storey house in Kashmir. The Muslim terrorists said on the interviews that they had no remorse on their acts. We had to flee from Kashmir because of the Muslim terrorists, and if you say that this is made up story, then I recommend you to think twice!

I am sorry for whatever happened to your neighbors. Islam does not allow such acts. Those people who do this, are not muslims. They are not even human beings. Just keep the patience Allah has punishments for such those people.

Let me tell you here one thing, dont ever associates such these acts or people to religion or tribe. My uncle saved one hindu family in his locality during riots keeping his life and his family at risk. Keep doing good work. Allah is knowing everything. Everyone will be rewarded based on his deeds.

Considering the facts that it were apes who slowly turned into human beings (which no one had forecasted at that time), Dinosaurs were present on earth before humans, similarly it is a possibility that the number of females get decreased some time in future and the number of males increase (whatever the reasons be). Now the problem is, that the Quran doesn't have any CLAUSE for such a kind of situation. Even if number of females decrease in future, they won't be able to marry many men because Quran prevents them from doing so? What is the solution for this situation?

Apes slowly turned into human beings, is not fact. Its a mare theory, unproved theory. If this would have been true why not human being turned into some other animal since human race is million years old. We should have wings by now or could swim and breathe like fish.. In other planets also we should have found some kind of human beings....Well these are all foolish talks. Lets not go there..

I mentioned already, Average life span of females is more than that of males By nature males and females are born in approximately the same ratio. During paediatric age however, in childhood itself a female child has more immunity than a male child. A female child can fight the germs and diseases better than the male child. For this reason, there are more deaths among males as compared to the females during paediatric age. So chances of going less females is very low. In case if this happens, divorce and marry another man could be the only option.


*I am sorry, if any of my explanations hurt you.
And I would expect serious discussions on topics rather making comments for no use. (This was not for you Anisha, for some other timepass people here).

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Apes slowly turned into human beings, is not fact. Its a mare theory, unproved theory. If this would have been true why not human being turned into some other animal since human race is million years old. We should have wings by now or could swim and breathe like fish.. In other planets also we should have found some kind of human beings....Well these are all foolish talks. Lets not go there..

*sigh*
Apes did NOT slowly turn into human beings. We just share a common ancestor.

I think BrianL was right. It's pointless. Unsubscribing...

Originally Posted by SilverBack ShaanAli, can you tell me on a personal level if in the event of a war females in your family were treated this way? I can understand the law but you are talking in a very general way, what happens if the same laws were applied to the females of your family.

I said earlier, I m saying now again. Dont conclude anything you read and start jumping. Holy books are not so easy to read and understand. Dont interpret them wrong. You can read my previous post. That should make you clear.

Originally Posted by SilverBack How can you not see the irrelevence of it all? I really do not know if you have ever questioned your religion or the Koran in the scientific, even global and personal light. How much IQ does it take to understand the grief of a young girl who has just been widowed and now is being raped? Even the beasts of the jungle do not do this - atleast intentionally and certainly not under the giuse of religion.

You can see Quran from any angle science, history, global, personal light or whatever. You wont get it wrong.

I would advise you to live in a Buddhist monk for a month. The simplicity of these monks is something to learn. They are about peace and poise. For them the defination if a defeat is getting into a fight. And I hope you realise after all the wars the world has fought and the blood that has been spilled we are still nowhere closer to peace. The end of a war is not and never would be peace. Comeon dude, you need to sit back and think and question and verify your religion before you come to a conclusion. You cannot and must not act simply because something was said by someone or someone wrote something.

This advice only for me? Did you apply on you and your family ever? What happened after coming back from there, you turned to buddhist or it was just a one month vacation..... My dear friend I am following religion which encourage the brotherhood, not war. For peace I dont need to go anywhere. I have peace nearby and in me.

Originally Posted by SL00b You didn't answer the question. How do you know that Jibril came down to earth several times and verified the Koran?

Its well known.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Its well known.

No it isn't, I don't know it. Don't even know who you're talking about.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Holy books are not so easy to read and understand. Dont interpret them wrong.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli You can see Quran from any angle science, history, global, personal light or whatever. You wont get it wrong.

Those two statements are mutually exclusive and contradict each other. Only one of them can be true, so I'd recommend to choose one.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Its well known.

It is called folklore. Many countries have legends/tales about heroes, mythical beasts, etc, and sometimes those stories are quite complicated, share same characters, etc. Those stories are well known, but it doesn't mean that anything described in those stories actually happened. "Well known" is not enough - you'll need to provide evidence of "Jibril" coming down. Also, there are "common misconceptions" - things that are "well known", but are not true. This could be one of them.

Originally Posted by baldy3105 No it isn't, I don't know it. Don't even know who you're talking about.

We are talking about angel Jibril. English name Gabriel.

Originally Posted by SigTerm Those two statements are mutually exclusive and contradict each other. Only one of them can be true, so I'd recommend to choose one.

Prove please how they are mutually exclusive and contradict.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Prove please how they are mutually exclusive and contradict.

"You won't get them wrong, you can read no matter what is your background" means it is impossible to misinterpret the book, no matter how much you know. "Don't get them wrong, holy books aren't easy" means it is possible to misinterpret the book without specialized knowledge that is hard to acquire. They can't be both simultaneously "true", so one of those statements is a lie/false. Choose which one.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli We are talking about angel Jibril. English name Gabriel.

I have not encountered existence of Jibril/Gabriel, I'm not a christian, so I conclude this is a folklore.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli We are talking about angel Jibril. English name Gabriel.

Just another mythological being. Another product of the human imagination.

Originally Posted by brianL Just another mythological being. Another product of the human imagination.

That is the whole point of it. If we speak about facts or once existing people or stuff we can both proove it and have some sort of evidence about it. Books are not evidence(already said why so no need repeat) about something like God because when it comes to God there is these problems:
1) If it existed in past we have no left-over evidence like archaeological findings about him so on;
2) If it exists in present we again have no evidence supporting this again because nothing that is said in holy books about him comes to life in real life + book itself don't have unique properties that is clearly made from "supermighty" creature;
3) If it will exist in future it is auto proof holy books lie unless God can do miracles but then it is auto proof holy books are human made because something that can send holy book to past can automaticaly make it unique and clear proof it comes from God(like make it contain future info + make book itself supernatural compared to regular books);
4)All above applies for Aliens too..but unlike God we know that there are way more planets and to think we are only living beeings in universe would be..ignorant and selfish.
Believers should bring more valid arguments in place not just "It was writen in book! That is why it is true!!!111oneoneoneeleven" You know what? In that case why don't you believe in Harry Potter? It is written in books too!

Originally Posted by ShaanAli We are talking about angel Jibril. English name Gabriel.

You know what's the main problem? As I understand it, your entire religion is based on assumption that Quran has divine origin (Christians have similar problem). I.e. if you remove this assumption, everything will collapse. Why is there only one book? Why only one prophet, only one nation, and only one divine visit (that happened long time ago)? I don't think that from all people on entire planet only one person was suitable for a prophet. A god (if exists/existed), could thousands of "angles" to multiple nations, find many prophets, and create many copies of the same text in different languages, then revisit people every 200 years to ensure they don't forget divine origin. If many similar religious texts appeared long time ago in different nations on different continents (i.e. they couldn't communicate with each other), then there would be a reason to think of "non-human" origin for a holy text. Why didn't it happen?

Originally Posted by Arcane 1) If it existed in past we have no left-over evidence like archaeological findings about him so on; 2) If it exists in present we again have no evidence supporting this again because nothing that is said in holy books about him comes to life in real life + book itself don't have unique properties that is clearly made from "supermighty" creature; 3) If it will exist in future it is auto proof holy books lie unless God can do miracles but then it is auto proof holy books are human made because something that can send holy book to past can automaticaly make it unique and clear proof it comes from God(like make it contain future info + make book itself supernatural compared to regular books);

There's one more scenario: if a deity exists/existed but cannot be discovered by humans. This scenario is incompatible with any religious text, but (IMO) existence of such scenario makes any religious discussion pointless.

Originally Posted by SigTerm {...}There's one more scenario: if a deity exists/existed but cannot be discovered by humans. This scenario is incompatible with any religious text, but (IMO) existence of such scenario makes any religious discussion pointless.

I covered this version too in previous posts. This extra version also prooves holy books lie because again nothing that is written comes true in real life outside book world.
Still noone can answer something like this: If God(allmighty, superior beeing and stuff like that) can and did(if it exists|existed) make perfect and enforcing(can't fight it) nature, planet system and life itself why it can't enforce something so silly easy as written text laws or human behavior or care about power and money? If it is because of free will then holy books again lie because holy books deny free will with hell consequence! Where is logic in this? Humans are like squashable bug to some creature like God..

Hmm, it is impossible to reason with someone who knows everything.
Another lesson learnt.
Reminds me of a 'fortune' I read once - ' The company of people searching for the truth is more bearable to the company of people who have already found it'.
I am letting this go as Shaanali instead of just answering the poll question is bent on arguing his case when we are not questioning his personal beliefs or his religion. This discussion is getting ridiculous (because of the claims being made and our friend Shaanali not able to understand our views).
Unsuscribing.