FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem

[MesMorial]

To people like “ringmaster” and those I debunked (but ignored it):


I've decided to dedicate this thread
(To debunking you). Of course, it’s your chance
To brandish your intellectual lance,
Even if it has a slightly LIMP head...
The loftiest challenge I had lately
Was finding an available avatar,
So -- if there’s anyone who’d like to spar,
Then present your case appropriately.

My intention isn’t to cause a FUSS,
Because the issue is past its bed time
And the sun is set on the croaking slime
Which is the irrelevance you discuss.
It is but a swampy, stinky mirror
Wherein frogs and toads compare figure.

...

I say you should be advocating the Qur’an-alone position as part of a move towards critical, unemotional and logical thinking. This will expose those who prefer bandwagons, confrontation and emotional jingoism.


Please study my “After-Dinner Address”:

http://allpoetry.com/column/9566615-Aft ... -by-Minhaj


You can view more of my philosophy here:

http://allpoetry.com/Minhaj


You excuse is that the Qur’an is a hostile threat (by itself), hence this thread.

This will be a definitive demonstration that FFI is out-of-date, and part of a harmful approach. Ali Sina et al. cannot deny.


Cheers.

[Fernando]

Goodness MesMorial! You've composed a verse equal to the Koran - and thereby debunked it!

[ringmaster]

...........................

You excuse is that the Qur’an is a hostile threat (by itself), hence this thread.

.................

The koran is hostile, because the koran tells you to obey your manwhore prophet. He was a nasty guy.

It also tells you you "seize them and kill them (apostates) wherever you find them" and to beat disobedient women.

[marduk]

The Quran alone is dangerous for the simple reason that it seeks to legislate practically every aspect of peoples' lives, completely arbitrarily. There is no explanation of why we should do what is stated by Muhammad to have come from a supernatural being, just that if we don't we'll be tortured forever after we die. It literally says that we must "obey Allah and his Apostle", just because they say so. There is never any explanation of how the particular commands will have a positive effect on society, the commands are simply stated and then the comment "Allah knows best", or something similar, is added at the end.

It also doesn't tell us why we must obey Muhammad in addition to Allah. It doesn't say "obey the Apostle when he repeats messages from Gabriel", it just says you must obey him, presumably at all times no matter what. If we do as the Quran says, we have to obey every word out of Muhammad's mouth. He could say "shine my sandals" and we would have to do it.

Since the Quran told the Arabs that Muhammad had been appointed absolute dictator by Allah, and since Muhammad was a mere human with no direct mental link with Allah (otherwise he wouldn't have needed to learn the Quran from Gabriel) and no particularly high intellect or qualifications to be a leader, it is obviously extremely dangerous. Muhammad could have ordered them to execute 800 innocent Jews, for instance, and then they would have to do it and then their souls would be forfeited to Satan. Sounds pretty dangerous to me.

Muhammad was a common Arab of his time, just a random Arab, not born of a virgin or anything unusual that would indicate divine predestination to lead mankind. Since the Quran promoted a random Arab to absolute dictator, it was during Muhammad's life the single most dangerous book ever composed. It is slightly less dangerous now but we still have the Imams trying to use the same scheme. Now they tell us it is they who must be obeyed. They issue a "fatwa" and Muslims have to do it. The fatwa isn't even claimed to have originated from Allah, because then Muhammad would not have been the final Prophet. So now we have Muslims obeying other random Arabs without even the justification that they are a Prophet. They got so dependent on Muhammad's dictates when he was alive that they couldn't live without dictates from somebody, so they just picked a random Arab and had him do the dictating now. Muslims are the craziest people I have ever heard of. Most people resent being told what to do. Arabs absolutely love it. What an odd people.

[Terrab]

...........................

You excuse is that the Qur’an is a hostile threat (by itself), hence this thread.

.................

The koran is hostile, because the koran tells you to obey your manwhore prophet. He was a nasty guy.

It also tells you you "seize them and kill them (apostates) wherever you find them" and to beat disobedient women.

Woot is there a place in the quran where it tells you to kill apostates wherever you find them? Must have slipped by me could you show me where its written Thank you.

Sorry for my spelling

[MesMorial]

Welcome;


ringmaster;


There is no verse telling Muslims to murder apostates. Verse 9:5 is in Sura 9, which comes after the verse 5:3 saying Islam is completed. Therefore 9:5 is not a religious precept, but a real-time example (just like 33:53). Sura 9 is no more practicable than 33:53, since it is about a real-time situation where the non-Muslims there were apparently hostile. The attitude that Muslims must take is that if He said so, it was so. There is no such Sura applicable for modern times.

“Obeying the Messenger” is addressed below. If you have read the articles, you will realise that the key to progress is the future, not the possible past.

I am not convinced that “idhrib” means “strike”. There are arguments relating to that, but I accept it here.

Firstly, the word is “strike”, not “beat” (which has different connotations).

It must be performed in a way which has purpose. “Beating” them makes no sense when it comes to preventing divorce, so it must be symbolic (i.e. a last statement).

The wife cannot be hospitalised, for she could not obey him afterwards (4:34). At least, she would not want to because women are not cattle who change their tune with violence. Rather, it should be an expression of contempt for her viewpoint. Divorce is not preferred (4:35), so all steps should be consistent with preventing it (not accelerating it). Thus, the head and sensitive/vulnerable parts should be avoided. This is consistent with the ahadith. The man would maybe lightly strike her once on the shoulder and push her (set forth) away a little, or once lightly on the chest. This would indicate he has had enough and that the “divorce wheel” is rolling. As soon as she obeys, the matter should be taken no further. If the man has struck her in this way once, and she is still resilient, separation should be sought (4:35). Striking more than once is adding to what the verse actually says (see 2:60 and 2:73).

In short, admonishing her is an attempt to get her to perform her duties. Separating her in bed is to give her a taste of divorce. Striking her (lightly) is to show that he has had enough. It is not supposed to injure her, because a man is never permitted to injure his wife (2:231). What 2:231 says is that if they are of a mindset which requires divorce, there should be no delaying it (i.e. divorce is the appropriate action, not the causing of injury AFTER preventative steps have been taken).

65:6 echoes this, showing that during the interim period of making up their minds (whether or not to divorce), injury is not permitted. If a man continuously beats his wife, he exceeds the purpose of the whole process.

Another point I want to make is that the ahadith (including the “Last Sermon”) specify a “light” beating. Since it is consistent with what I said, the issue is not what the Qur’an actually says, but the interpretation men take. There is a logical one (which should be promoted), and there is an illogical one (which should be demoted). “ringmaster” assumes the latter is the true one.

Besides, domestic violence is something which has and still affects the West. It was quite common in Victorian times through to the 20th century. The point is that it is mentality which causes it, not books. This mentality will also cause people to misinterpret the verse.

Logical and unemotional thinking must be encouraged.



Marduk;


Your reason on arbitrariness is an issue for people who call themselves “Muslims”. This has no connection with the Qur’an making Muslims a threat to those who do not think Islam is true.

Your point about “obeying the Messenger” rests in peace here:

http://allpoetry.com/poem/9484601-LESSO ... -by-Minhaj

You do not have to worry about cleaning sandals; all you need to consider is the Qur'an.


The purpose of this thread is to present logic, and question why it is not adhered to.


Cheers.

[yeezevee]

Welcome;

http://allpoetry.com/poem/9484601-LESSO ... -by-Minhaj

Cheers.

great MesMorial./ good writing., so you mean to say all that you write at that link proves that QUran is word of god/allah in this 21st century??

[MesMorial]

Welcome;

http://allpoetry.com/poem/9484601-LESSO ... -by-Minhaj

Cheers.

great MesMorial./ good writing., so you mean to say all that you write at that link proves that QUran is word of god/allah in this 21st century??

Is that what I conveyed?

[Terrab]

MesMorial.

So surah 9 is not a part of the quran? Is that why there is no Bisimiallah in the beging of it?

which comes after the verse 5:3 saying Islam is completed.

Any refferences? How do you know that surah 96 is the first surah and that surah 9:5 comes after surah 5:3 if you dont follow any other book than Quran it self?

Where is the quran does it show us the time and date of each aya that was reveald?

Sorry for my spelling

[yeezevee]

Welcome;

http://allpoetry.com/poem/9484601-LESSO ... -by-Minhaj

Cheers.

great MesMorial./ good writing., so you mean to say all that you write at that link proves that QUran is word of god/allah in this 21st century??

Is that what I conveyed?

well, I am not sure what you are trying to convey and it appears neither you are sure about what you want to convey., If it is NOT word of god.Allah.. why worry about?? just say that upfront

[MesMorial]

Terrab;

The absence of the bismallah only supports by point - it is not a part of the religion. The purpose of the Message is to provide guidance and mercy.

If you equate this to being separate from the Qur'an, you should apologise for your logic instead.

If Sura 9 came before 5:3, and 9:5 promotes violence against all non-Muslims, how do you explain the contradictions? With such contradictions, no-one should take your point seriously.

This leads to another point - 9:5 refers to a contextual example (see surrounding verses). I simply used the argument above because it was quicker.

As for your questions, the answer is that the Qur'an is simply a document not all of which is actual precept. All that you need to know is there.


Do you know what the Qur'an is?

The Qur’an is a book of moral and spiritual guidance (e.g. 7:52, 17:9), similitudes/examples (e.g. 3:61, 17:89, 66:1-5), narratives (e.g. 12:3), parables (e.g. 14:24) and real-time “Revelations” (e.g. 9:5, 33:59). All of these attributes contribute to the guiding quality of its message.

All revelation permanent to its addressees is included (e.g. 33:50). Where required, context is provided by the Qur’an itself.


Thus show me a reference telling me your question is relevant.

[MesMorial]

yeezevee;


Maybe that is because you did not visit the second link on this thread.

Therefore you would not know that I knew what I wanted to convey.

...

[Terrab]

All that you need to know is there.

The quran might be complete but is the human mind complete Mes? You denie the hadith but dont you to think we can use the hadith as a key to open more doors to understanding the quran better?

According to your argument we base that surah 9 came after surah 5 because of logic. But where in the quran does it say we should use logic to determen something about the kitab?

[MesMorial]

Terrab;

In belief, there are many things that are not logical (including your question). My preference is to alert those who believe in logic. This is a logic thread, not an attempt to convert people.

Now just study 4:82.

As for understanding the Qur'an, please tell me where the Qur'an says you should use ahadith to understand it better.

...

[iffo]

Welcome;

http://allpoetry.com/poem/9484601-LESSO ... -by-Minhaj

Cheers.

great MesMorial./ good writing., so you mean to say all that you write at that link proves that QUran is word of god/allah in this 21st century??

MM will never answer this question, because that will expose him. He is a quran muslim in disguise, not sure why he is scared to admit that he believes quran to be from god.

MesMorial
As for understanding the Qur'an, please tell me where the Qur'an says you should use ahadith to understand it better.

Can you practice pillars of Islam with out hadiths?

[yeezevee]

................
MM will never answer this question, because that will expose him. He is a quran muslim in disguise, not sure why he is scared to admit that he believes quran to be from god.

that is all right iffo., there are billions of people believe in one thing or other thing., As long as they don't throw that on our heads and we have freedom to question them and to educate others.. they have the right to believe in spaghetti monster

But I am not really..really certain about Mm

[yeezevee]

yeezevee;


Maybe that is because you did not visit the second link on this thread.

Therefore you would not know that I knew what I wanted to convey.

...

i don't mind reading links MesMorial .. where is it? you mean this one http://allpoetry.com/column/9566615-Aft ... -by-Minhaj

[Terrab]

Terrab;

In belief, there are many things that are not logical (including your question). My preference is to alert those who believe in logic. This is a logic thread, not an attempt to convert people.

Now just study 4:82.

As for understanding the Qur'an, please tell me where the Qur'an says you should use ahadith to understand it better.

...

Where in the quran does it say learn arabic to understand it better?
If one belive in god one should know god gave us a brain laws and logic for a reason, one should also know the limits of logic. There is nothing logical about flying, still we find the messenger flying to the farest mosque. Injeel Tawrat and Zabur along with hadiths and books of science and dictionaries helps us understand the quran better and expand our knowledge and understanding of it. If we where to use the quran and the quran only than how are we suposse to know who people like dhul qarnayn, Fir'aun, Josua, Jalut.

So Mes should we isolate our knowledge to the quran?

[yeezevee]

If we where to use the quran and the quran only than how are we suposse to know who people like dhul qarnayn, Fir'aun, Josua, Jalut.

yap..add more, Zayd.. Abī-Lahab

[MesMorial]

Iffo;


…

Of course you can. Or else I would not have said you were out of date.


http://allpoetry.com/poem/9484947-LESSO ... -by-Minhaj

http://allpoetry.com/poem/9484975-LESSO ... -by-Minhaj


Sacred months and rituals of Hajj were already practiced, thus “sunna revelation” is irrelevant.

Now please refute (preferably with verses).



yeezevee;


Which part of the link do you find funny?



Terrab


You did not answer me.

You believe that God can do anything, but then Muhammad flying does not give permission for you to fly over logic. The existence of the Qur’anic God is inexplicable, and the only consequence of your belief is that you should worry about the Qur’an.

About Arabic, maybe this verse will satisfy you.


“And we have given you (O, Muhammad) your Sunna, that with it you may explain the verses that are already clear (2:118, 3:7, 4:176, 6:55, 6:105, 6:126, 9:11, 11:1, 29:49), so that Muslims will not have to study the Qur’an again, though We said that they should in 2:44, 2:121, 4:82 and 3:79, that you may admonish those who interpret it themselves, though we gave them such a right in 5:42-43, 23:68, 34:46, 38:29 and 67:10, that they may claim to be illiterate in Arabic, though it is in clear Arabic tongue (12:2, 13:37, 14:4, 16:103, 19:97, 26:195, 41:3, 41:44, 42:7, 43:3, 46:12), that they may ask silly questions (2:67-71), that you may admonish those who take the Message as a complete guidance, though We said that it was in 2:159, 4:174-175, 5:16, 7:52, 10:57, 17:9, 17:89, 18:54, 28:49, 34:6 and 42:52, or a distinct explanation of all things as We ordained in 7:145, 12:111, 25:33 and 44:4; that they may record your ahadith for everything, although they may not believe in any hadith besides this (45:6), for who is truer in hadith than God (4:87)? That you and others may be taken as Lord, against 3:79, that you may alter the Message though it contains the same system We revealed to other Prophets (4:26, 42:13), and though God does not change His Sunna (17:77, 35:43, 48:23), that you may render it incomplete, though We completed it (5:3, 6:115), that you may not judge by the Book as We revealed in 2:176, 4:105, 5:44, 5:48 and 6:114, that you may impose on them teachings We allowed them to disbelieve (2:23, 11:13, 52:34), that you may prohibit what God has not prohibited (5:87, 6:145-146, 7:32) that you may be more than a plain warner, though your only duty is to give a plain warning (5:62, 5:99, 6:19, 6:51, 7:2, 7:184, 16:35, 18:27, 19:97, 20:113, 24:54, 35:23, 38:70, 42:7), that you may follow a path other than the right one (2:170, 6:50, 6:106, 6:126, 6:153-6:157, 7:3, 7:203, 19:36, 25:56-57, 34:6) that they may accept religion based on their opinions of people (10:35-37), believing in Abu Huraira as well as what we ordained in 4:136, and justify it with obvious distortions (47:30) and flowery, frivolous ahadith (6:112, 31:6), that they may worship as the Jahiliyyah (43:21-22), that they may play the majority game (6:116, 12:106) and deny (6:23). Indeed, God is Knowing, Wise.”


Unfortunately, no such verse exists.

About those people, does the Qur’an say you should not study history (e.g. the other books)? Does use of these people (as examples) fall short of what is necessary (for guidance)?

As I explained to you before, the Qur'an contains examples. The actual biography of people (before their example) is not required. If it is, it is provided (e.g. Musa). Please provide a verse contradicting me.


P.S. If I do not know where Mecca is, how will Hadith help?