Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> Questions for Islam., Drop your questions here and discuss. (Religious Issues)

views
     
zamorin
post Yesterday, 12:33 PM

Resident Carouser
*******
Senior Member
6,328 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
From: Malaysia Darul Harapan
QUOTE(MAGAMan-X @ Aug 19 2019, 12:27 PM)
It changes the quality of the revelation, and its relevance to the religion.
52:20 is exactly where "houri" is referenced. Wait... You don't know the controversy behind the term "houri"? Lol, read the NYT article below then.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houri

https://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/04/opinion/...and-grapes.html
*
Ofcourse, only you know the correct interpretation. What makes you the authority in interpretation or to assume that your interpretation is correct? The problem is that, it doesn't even need interpretation, it is a literal translation.

This post has been edited by zamorin: Yesterday, 12:34 PM
MAGAMan-X
post Yesterday, 12:37 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
201 posts

Joined: Apr 2019


QUOTE(zamorin @ Aug 19 2019, 12:33 PM)
Ofcourse, only you know the correct interpretation. What makes you the authority in interpretation or to assume that your interpretation is correct? The problem is that, it doesn't  even need interpretation, it is a literal translation.
*
How is it "my interpretation"? Did I write the wiki and NYT article?
zamorin
post Yesterday, 12:43 PM

Resident Carouser
*******
Senior Member
6,328 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
From: Malaysia Darul Harapan
QUOTE(MAGAMan-X @ Aug 19 2019, 12:37 PM)
How is it "my interpretation"? Did I write the wiki  and NYT article?
*
It is not the interpretation that you think is correct? Are you giving articles to discredit the interpretation and not support the interpretation you believe in? This when there is no interpretation required for a literal translation.

This post has been edited by zamorin: Yesterday, 12:47 PM
MAGAMan-X
post Yesterday, 12:50 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
201 posts

Joined: Apr 2019


QUOTE(zamorin @ Aug 19 2019, 12:43 PM)
It is not the interpretation that you think is correct?
No.

QUOTE(zamorin @ Aug 19 2019, 12:43 PM)
Are you giving articles to discredit the interpretation  not support the interpretation you believe in? This when there is no interpretation required for a literal translation.
*
It matters not to me who has the right interpretation. I'm pointing out the level of tawriya apologists will employ in other to make the religion look good in the eyes of the world. Did you not get that point from my initial post?
zamorin
post Yesterday, 01:35 PM

Resident Carouser
*******
Senior Member
6,328 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
From: Malaysia Darul Harapan
QUOTE(MAGAMan-X @ Aug 19 2019, 12:50 PM)
No.
It matters not to me who has the right interpretation. I'm pointing out the level of tawriya apologists will employ in other to make the religion look good in the eyes of the world. Did you not get that point from my initial post?
*
No, you dont get the fact that a literal translation requires no interpretation. If it did not matter to you who has the right interpretation, then why bother to post a link that you claim to discredit the tawriya or whatever apologists?

QUOTE(MAGAMan-X @ Aug 19 2019, 12:50 PM)
No.
*
Then what was the point of the link? You were just posting some irrelevant links with no purpose?

This post has been edited by zamorin: Yesterday, 01:37 PM
MAGAMan-X
post Yesterday, 02:45 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
201 posts

Joined: Apr 2019


QUOTE(zamorin @ Aug 19 2019, 01:35 PM)
No, you dont get the  fact that a literal translation requires no interpretation. If it did not matter to you who has the right interpretation, then why bother to post a link that you claim to discredit the tawriya or whatever apologists?
I'm telling you there are people who say the literal interpretation is "white grapes", and I have stated it as such in my statement, the article is to substantiate why I wrote it. Obviously you didn't read the article (nor what I wrote for that matter)

QUOTE(zamorin @ Aug 19 2019, 01:35 PM)
Then what was the point of the link? You were just posting some irrelevant links with no purpose?
*
Was it not obvious? I stated it right there directly in the post. In case it wasn't apparent for you, I will show it again.

QUOTE(MAGAMan-X @ Aug 19 2019, 12:06 PM)
In other words, muslims took that verse out of context, something they often accuse non muslims of.
*
System Error Message
post Yesterday, 06:03 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,052 posts

Joined: Jul 2010
QUOTE(zamorin @ Aug 19 2019, 09:59 AM)
I very well know he's a Christian Fundamentalist but it doesn't change the fact that what he says is correct. A claim stands or falls on it's own merit and is independent on the one who is making the claim. I don't like him either btw. He's a hypocrite for not seeing the immorality of his own religion yet espousing faults with Islam alone. The Christian equivalent of the mentally and morally challenged Zakir Naik.

What do you expect Muslims to tell? Ofcourse they are going to defend him and claim he was not a paedophile (actually some do claim he is but defend it as being some Arab culture back then) and will do anything to deny or dance around it. The correct age of Aishah even by the Muslim scholars themselves is close to 12. OK let's just suppose she was 16. Do you know the horrific background of how she was taken as his wife? After killing her own parents in front of her. You can throw consent right out of the window.

Quran makes a grandiose claim that "killing one human is like killing the whole of humanity". How come then he didn't stick to that moral principles in the Quran? Are prophets supposed to be excluded from it or the ones who champions their own principles? I 100% expect another tap dance. That's the problem with all religions and it's adherents.

---------------------

There is a disagreement even within the Muslim scholars themselves about her age and here you are telling she is confirmed to be 16. Some puts here age when she was married at 6, 9, 12 and reaching the age of puberty and every other age in between but no one states it as 16.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha#Marriage_to_Muhammad
Aisha's age at the time of her marriage is frequently mentioned in Islamic literature.[17] According to John Esposito, Aisha was married to Muhammad in Mecca in 624CE, after Hegira to Medina and the Battle of Badr.[30] Several scholars interpret this to indicate that she reached puberty at this age,[15][17][31][32] although her age at the time is the subject of dispute. Al-Tabari says she was nine at the time her marriage was consummated.[33] Sahih al-Bukhari's hadith says "that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old;"[34] other sources differ on the age of marriage, but agree that the marriage was not consummated at the time of the marriage contract.[35] All biographical information on Muhammad and his companions was first recorded over a century after his death,[36] but the ahadith[37] and sīra (traditional Islamic biographies of Muhammad) provide records of early Islam through an unbroken chain of transmission. Various hadith stating that Aisha was either nine or ten at the time of her consummation come from collections with sahih status, meaning they are regarded as reputable by most Sunni Muslims.[34][38] Some other traditional sources also mention Aisha's age. The sīra of Ibn Ishaq edited by Ibn Hisham states that she was nine or ten years old at the consummation.[39] The historian al-Tabari also states that she was nine.[40] Marriage at a young age was not unheard of at the time, and Aisha's marriage to Muhammad may have had a political connotation, as her father Abu Bakr was an influential man in the community.[41] Abu Bakr, on his part, may have sought to further the bond of kinship between Muhammad and himself by joining their families together in marriage via Aisha. Leila Ahmed notes that Aisha's betrothal and marriage to Muhammad are presented as ordinary in Islamic literature, and may indicate that it was not unusual for children to be married to their elders in that era.[42]
*
Actually only few muslims know that aisha was 16 and not below 10, most muslims even google defend this point by talking about the legal marriage age of some states in the US being below 10 and that it was the norm back than for child marriages to happen. Factually Aishah was 16 when she married the prophet, and that the hadith narrated a mentally ill person. The problem with a lot of hadiths even one that is said to be sahih is that they are factually incorrect about various events and items or rather show that islam is not from god.

The way the hadith system works is that quite often it has a long chain of narrators, but even so if the original or source is bad, than the entire chain is useless because all the chain does is verify whether or not such a thing was said but never verifies the factual part of what was said.

And even more annoying is that i should not be here explaining or defending Islam, but i would like people to argue on better points. If you read down in the point about the marriage, it stated that her age was not confirmed, but a more scientific approach verifies her age to be above 13 at the point of marriage based on various other events and sources studied making the traditional hadith false. I think the main issue with muslims is that they are unable to accept a hadith can be false and so a lot of false things are easily spread. I recently debated with the ustaz about a hadith (specifically al-fath 40) which mentioned that the angel told muhammad that it didnt like dogs and wouldnt enter a house with a dog or picture, as i know no angel considers presence of a person, animal, picture(was searching for ruling on pictures, 1 sauce all pictures are unacceptable quoting this), altar or statue to be an item which would make them decide not to enter a place, especially if given a task by god. The ustaz still considered such hadiths to be accurate and true despite being proven completely false. Thing is, i have not yet encountered a dog that even if it barks madly at others would bark at me when passing by homes.

So the hadiths clash with scientific study, one could conduct a scientific study and find a lot of hadith to be false. Its easy to make up a hadith for people to believe it to be true and say things that the prophet didnt say, which makes the question more interesting of whether or not they would reject things that are clearly untrue or cling on to them and show that they clearly do not understand what a religion from god is like.

I would take the results of a scientific study over a chain of narrators who say one thing and pass the message on, which is likely to get messed up so the hadith system is unreliable. To give you an example, while the exact sentence narrated would be the same, but not the understanding as the scholar would most often misinterpret things and then mess things up more as things go down the chain as most like to take only a part of something rather than the whole thing. This is something everyone is guilty of. critics quote partial text and when i study it i find that reading before and after it is totally irrelevant. Muslims do the same to the old and new testament when looking for proof about muhammad failing to consider the entire sentence and not a part of it.

Short version is, muslims believe their prophet to be a pedophile, science says otherwise.
zamorin
post Today, 09:07 AM

Resident Carouser
*******
Senior Member
6,328 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
From: Malaysia Darul Harapan
QUOTE(MAGAMan-X @ Aug 19 2019, 02:45 PM)
I'm telling you there are people who say the literal interpretation is "white grapes", and I have stated it as such in my statement, the article is to substantiate why I wrote it. Obviously you didn't read the article (nor what I wrote for that matter)
Was it not obvious? I stated it right there directly in the post. In case it wasn't apparent for you, I will show it again.
*
Any other bullshit? Either you don't understand what a literal translation means or you are pretending you don't understand what it means? But going by your previous records and your reputation here as a spinner, I'll go with the later.

This post has been edited by zamorin: Today, 09:17 AM
zamorin
post Today, 09:14 AM

Resident Carouser
*******
Senior Member
6,328 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
From: Malaysia Darul Harapan
QUOTE(System Error Message @ Aug 19 2019, 06:03 PM)
Actually only few muslims know that aisha was 16 and not below 10
*
Actually only a few Muslims know Aisha was 16? Muslims like you? What are your credentials to claim to know more than these Muslim scholars? So the reputable Sunni Muslims and the various Hadiths were lying? and you know better than them or the various Muslim scholars?

QUOTE(System Error Message @ Aug 19 2019, 06:03 PM)
and that the hadith narrated a mentally ill person.
*
It is not just from one Hadith , it is from several. Which Hadith are you claiming is narrated by a mentally ill person? If that Hadith is known to be false, why isn't that Hadith discarded then? You means its ok to teach a hadith that is known to be false? What does that say about the credibility of Hadith and Islam then if they are knowingly teaching falsehood? (as per your claim)

Like I said in my prior post:

QUOTE
I 100% expect another tap dance.


This post has been edited by zamorin: Today, 09:32 AM
ramz
post Today, 09:25 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
5,620 posts

Joined: Jan 2009
QUOTE(System Error Message @ Aug 19 2019, 06:03 PM)
Actually only few muslims know that aisha was 16 and not below 10, most muslims even google defend this point by talking about the legal marriage age of some states in the US being below 10 and that it was the norm back than for child marriages to happen. Factually Aishah was 16 when she married the prophet, and that the hadith narrated a mentally ill person. The problem with a lot of hadiths even one that is said to be sahih is that they are factually incorrect about various events and items or rather show that islam is not from god.

The way the hadith system works is that quite often it has a long chain of narrators, but even so if the original or source is bad, than the entire chain is useless because all the chain does is verify whether or not such a thing was said but never verifies the factual part of what was said.

And even more annoying is that i should not be here explaining or defending Islam, but i would like people to argue on better points. If you read down in the point about the marriage, it stated that her age was not confirmed, but a more scientific approach verifies her age to be above 13 at the point of marriage based on various other events and sources studied making the traditional hadith false. I think the main issue with muslims is that they are unable to accept a hadith can be false and so a lot of false things are easily spread. I recently debated with the ustaz about a hadith (specifically al-fath 40) which mentioned that the angel told muhammad that it didnt like dogs and wouldnt enter a house with a dog or picture, as i know no angel considers presence of a person, animal, picture(was searching for ruling on pictures, 1 sauce all pictures are unacceptable quoting this), altar or statue to be an item which would make them decide not to enter a place, especially if given a task by god. The ustaz still considered such hadiths to be accurate and true despite being proven completely false. Thing is, i have not yet encountered a dog that even if it barks madly at others would bark at me when passing by homes.

So the hadiths clash with scientific study, one could conduct a scientific study and find a lot of hadith to be false. Its easy to make up a hadith for people to believe it to be true and say things that the prophet didnt say, which makes the question more interesting of whether or not they would reject things that are clearly untrue or cling on to them and show that they clearly do not understand what a religion from god is like.

I would take the results of a scientific study over a chain of narrators who say one thing and pass the message on, which is likely to get messed up so the hadith system is unreliable. To give you an example, while the exact sentence narrated would be the same, but not the understanding as the scholar would most often misinterpret things and then mess things up more as things go down the chain as most like to take only a part of something rather than the whole thing. This is something everyone is guilty of. critics quote partial text and when i study it i find that reading before and after it is totally irrelevant. Muslims do the same to the old and new testament when looking for proof about muhammad failing to consider the entire sentence and not a part of it.

Short version is, muslims believe their prophet to be a pedophile, science says otherwise.
*
Hadith Al Bukhari, is narrated that Aisha was 6 years old when she married the prophet

We got 3 choices
1. Believe the hadith sahih. All of it.
2. Don't believe the hadith sahih, meaning reject the whole hadith.
3. Believe what u want , and don't believe what u don't want in the hadith, which to me is as good as option 2.

Most Muslims is number 3. Believe it or not. But they insist they are number 1. How it works is when they don't like what they read in the hadith, they will find reasons to justify, but will stop short of saying hadith Al bukhari is not reliable. They will never say that. So effectively , they are a number 3 who thinks they are a number 1.

More info: my spouse just told me there are some who says 97% of the hadith sahih is correct. The other 3 % is not correct based on some evidence whatever they may be. But what makes the other 97% correct? Just because there is no evidence it is not correct? The burden of proof is now to prove the 97% is incorrect, else it stands correct. Auta logic.

This post has been edited by ramz: Today, 10:16 AM
MAGAMan-X
post Today, 10:53 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
201 posts

Joined: Apr 2019


QUOTE(zamorin @ Aug 20 2019, 09:07 AM)
Any other bullshit? Either you don't understand what a literal translation means or you are pretending you don't understand what it means? But going by your previous records and your reputation here as a spinner, I'll go with the later.
*
Do you have something wrong with your head? When have i made any translation of anything?

Quote EXACTLY where I have made any translation. If anything, you're the one who don't even know what you're quoting regarding "houri", you claim a verse and don't even know the term is there.

This post has been edited by MAGAMan-X: Today, 10:55 AM

76 Pages « < 74 75 76Top
 

Switch to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0996sec    2.67    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 20th August 2019 - 11:10 AM