Hello Folks, Fawzia here! I was a Quranist for 10 months.
-
Well, for one thing, this enabled him to get multiple wives & get these wives to obey him, through divinely mandated revelations I am not even speaking of hadiths, simply Quran.
3330 O ye wives of the Prophet! Whosoever of you committeth manifest lewdness, the punishment for her will be doubled, and that is easy for Allah.
So we see even from the Quran that this person Muhammad is having multiple wives & they're supposedly getting threats from the Creator if they are lewd. Naturally, saying such stuff will make wives obedient & multiple wives & chaste wives is something Muhammad will get via claims of revelations.
3331 And whosoever of you is submissive unto Allah and His messenger and doeth right, We shall give her her reward twice over, and We have prepared for her a rich provision.
Again, via Allah Muhammad can get his wives to be submissive here, like he could get them to be chaste in the earlier verses.
Its like a carrot & stick policy, be lewd & God'll punish you & be submissive & He'll reward you. ;DWow, you were a Quranist for 10 months and this is what you came up with? I think we need to change ?Quranist of the Year? to ?Comatose Quranist of the Year?.
First and foremost, 33/30 is talking about MANIFEST LEWDNESS. Lewdness is not disobedience. 33/30 is telling them, that if they are immoral, their punishment is doubled. It never says obey your husband. It never gives Muhammad the authority to punish them either. They are simply mothers to believers and so hold a higher moral standing.
33/31 is talking about ?Allah and his MESSENGER?. I dunno if this is a ?desperate attempt to salvage my faith? (by using Quran to explain Quran) or whatever but the MESSENGER only judges by the Quran (4?/65, 4/105) so when the woman obeys the messenger here, we?re not talking about Muhammad?s whims and fancies. You may object by saying ?well Muhammad authored Quran too? so I will counterpose the question to you ?then why doesn?t it tell these ladies ?don?t ever reject him for sex? or ?always obey whatever he asks?. The Quran NEVER serves Muhammad?s whims and fancies.
Your 10 month Quranist ?tour of duty? needs a little touch up story there, Fawzia. -
I never aid that there aren't enough genuine reasons to reject hadiths, I wouldn't have beome a hadith rejector had I not found sufficient reasons. However, some Muslims of my acquaintance-online & offline who're turning Quranist do actually take this step more from the attempt to reject the obnoxious way Muhammad is portrayed in hadiths, rather than due to any genuine & extensive scholarship.
Please tell us
-
What are genuine reasons to reject hadith?
-
What is 'genuine and extensive scholarship'? An example would be good.
-
-
Wow, you were a Quranist for 10 months and this is what you came up with? I think we need to change ?Quranist of the Year? to ?Comatose Quranist of the Year?.
First and foremost, 33/30 is talking about MANIFEST LEWDNESS. Lewdness is not disobedience. 33/30 is telling them, that if they are immoral, their punishment is doubled. It never says obey your husband. It never gives Muhammad the authority to punish them either. They are simply mothers to believers and so hold a higher moral standing.
33/31 is talking about ?Allah and his MESSENGER?. I dunno if this is a ?desperate attempt to salvage my faith? (by using Quran to explain Quran) or whatever but the MESSENGER only judges by the Quran (4?/65, 4/105) so when the woman obeys the messenger here, we?re not talking about Muhammad?s whims and fancies. You may object by saying ?well Muhammad authored Quran too? so I will counterpose the question to you ?then why doesn?t it tell these ladies ?don?t ever reject him for sex? or ?always obey whatever he asks?. The Quran NEVER serves Muhammad?s whims and fancies.
Your 10 month Quranist ?tour of duty? needs a little touch up story there, Fawzia.Muslims I know, in my daily life as well as online are usually as full of insults as ever, if not outright death threats, if someone should reject their "glorious book." ;D
-
Muslims I know, in my daily life as well as online are usually as full of insults as ever, if not outright death threats, if someone should reject their "glorious book." ;D
Lol, no one gives a toss what you accept or reject but your reading of 33/30-31 is LAUGHABLE. As Jack says, you're clutching at straws and it shows. I await your rebuttal to my answer (if you got time to scrape one up despite your busy schedule).
-
Muslims I know, in my daily life as well as online are usually as full of insults as ever, if not outright death threats, if someone should reject their "glorious book." ;D
I smell contradiction
In addition, while my life has been quite free from discrimination(I don't have anyAyaan Hirsi Ali type sob stories) & my parents were fully accepting of my apostasy & most Muslims too haven't harassed me in anyway for leaving Islam-a very unpleasant incident had happened to an aunt of mine, which I felt was due to the Quran. That forced me to finally leave Islam altogether.
-
I smell contradiction
No contradiction at all.
First I said,
In addition, while my life has been quite free from discrimination(I don't have anyAyaan Hirsi Ali type sob stories) & my parents were fully accepting of my apostasy & most Muslims too haven't harassed me in anyway for leaving Islam-a very unpleasant incident had happened to an aunt of mine, which I felt was due to the Quran. That forced me to finally leave Islam altogether.
I said most Muslims, not all Muslims. Besides, I wouldn't exactly call somone trying to insult me out of an internet forum as "harassment". I have received more than one death threat on the net as well.
Offline, I've received no death threats, although many tried to talk me into accepting Islam back, some tried to ridicule my intelligence, education etc into trying to make me accept Islam again.
But then, that too is hardly harassment-I believe everyone has the right to proselytize, even atheists & polytheistic idolators,& however much I dislike Islam, I woudn't deny them this right. And everyone, including Muslims have the right to be rude.
-
I smell contradiction
Lets not forget the change in the attitude to Arabic. At first it was a totally racist attitude and now its a whiny 'but i dont have the time', lol.
You know how it is with these fakes once they're exposed, Sarah.
-
Fawzia you indicated a mostly pleasant experience yet now you state "in my daily life as well as online are usually as full of insults". Insults are not considered pleasant.
Lets not forget the change in the attitude to Arabic. At first it was a totally racist attitude and now its a whiny 'but i dont have the time', lol.
You know how it is with these fakes once they're exposed, Sarah.
too true.. Makes me wonder actually what brings a person with no interest in muslims and islam to a place like this?
-
too true.. Makes me wonder actually what brings a person with no interest in muslims and islam to a place like this?
To practise their 'cut and paste' scholarship. I'm waiting to see Fawzia's defense of her statement that abandoning hadith is a 'desperate attempt by Quranists to salvage their faith'. That's gonna be fun.
-
Lets not forget the change in the attitude to Arabic. At first it was a totally racist attitude and now its a whiny 'but i dont have the time', lol.
You know how it is with these fakes once they're exposed, Sarah.
Sure, anyone leaving Islam is either a fake or abused by violent cultural Muslims or brainwashed by the West. Islam isn't a race, disliking Islam isn't racist although Muslims love to hold up that race card. Its getting to be an old trick now.
Disliking Islam isn't a crime either.
Fawzia you indicated a mostly pleasant experience yet now you state "in my daily life as well as online are usually as full of insults". Insults are not considered pleasant.
too true.. Makes me wonder actually what brings a person with no interest in muslims and islam to a place like this?
Where did I indicate some extraordinarily pleasant experience? I said I have lead a reasonably good & privileged life, have parents supportive of my apostasy & no genital mutilation, attempted honor killing type experience.
I do have interest in Islam & Muslims, only I am not going to learn Arabic. This forum has sub forums about Judaism, Xtianity, Hinduism, Buddhism & this site invites people of all these religions to learn about Quranist Islam.
Have all the members bothered to learn up Hebrew, Aramaic, Sanskrit, Pali, Prakrit, Gurmukhi etc?
-
Sure, anyone leaving Islam is either a fake or abused by violent cultural Muslims or brainwashed by the West. Islam isn't a race, disliking Islam isn't racist although Muslims love to hold up that race card. Its getting to be an old trick now.
Disliking Islam isn't a crime either.
Islam isn't a race but Muslims don't subscribe to Islam totally either. Muslims are subscribers to a culture which has taken on various hues over time. There are hundreds of different hues of Pakistanis, for example but they are all part of the Pakistani 'race' (where race is a constructed group). However, you attacked ALL pakistanis in this thread, even attacked the non-Pakistani Samia. That makes YOU a racist.
Hey, don't forget my questions to you, ex-Quranists. I can't wait to see your answers.
-
Sure, anyone leaving Islam is either a fake or abused by violent cultural Muslims or brainwashed by the West. Islam isn't a race, disliking Islam isn't racist although Muslims love to hold up that race card. Its getting to be an old trick now.
Disliking Islam isn't a crime either.
Where did I indicate some extraordinarily pleasant experience? I said I have lead a reasonably good & privileged life, have parents supportive of my apostasy & no genital mutilation, attempted honor killing type experience.
I do have interest in Islam & Muslims, only I am not going to learn Arabic. This forum has sub forums about Judaism, Xtianity, Hinduism, Buddhism & this site invites people of all these religions to learn about Quranist Islam.
Have all the members bothered to learn up Hebrew, Aramaic, Sanskrit, Pali, Prakrit, Gurmukhi etc?
I have to agree that Muslim is not a race, nor is Christianity or even Judaism and, as a God-alone Christian, I have no intention to learn Arabic either, I have an English translation that serves me well, even though I understand that the translation may not be totally accurate. But I do not understand why you should lump all Muslims, or even worse, all Islam together as one. They are not. You can't do that with any religion.
-
Islam isn't a race but Muslims don't subscribe to Islam totally either. Muslims are subscribers to a culture which has taken on various hues over time. There are hundreds of different hues of Pakistanis, for example but they are all part of the Pakistani 'race' (where race is a constructed group). However, you attacked ALL pakistanis in this thread, even attacked the non-Pakistani Samia. That makes YOU a racist.
Hey, don't forget my questions to you, ex-Quranists. I can't wait to see your answers.
What did I attack Samia for? Her claim that cousin marriages don't happen in the UK, well it does happen amongst the Pakistani community frequently, & unfortunately "forced" marriages too happen. Surely I can attack anyone for their ignorance or deliberate attempts to mislead. ;D ;D
I can now claim that you folks insulted my Shia heritage numerouys times, but I realise that there was no such thing.
-
What did I attack Samia for? Her claim that cousin marriages don't happen in the UK, well it does happen amongst the Pakistani community frequently, & unfortunately "forced" marriages too happen. Surely I can attack anyone for their ignorance or deliberate attempts to mislead. ;D ;D
I can now claim that you folks insulted my Shia heritage numerouys times, but I realise that there was no such thing.
You attacked Pakistanis for something which a statistic claimed. A statistic by definition is based on a given sample but you extended it to ALL Pakistanis. Hence, you're a racist.
I never attacked shia, nor mentioned Iran nor even care if you're some alabaster skinned iranian. In terms of personality, you're clearly a smeegol and that's what I'm going to highlight.
Why do you keep avoiding my above questions? Are you afraid of getting exposed?
-
You attacked Pakistanis for something which a statistic claimed. A statistic by definition is based on a given sample but you extended it to ALL Pakistanis. Hence, you're a racist.
I never attacked shia, nor mentioned Iran nor even care if you're some alabaster skinned iranian. In terms of personality, you're clearly a smeegol and that's what I'm going to highlight.
Why do you keep avoiding my above questions? Are you afraid of getting exposed?
Again, Pakistan isn't a race, and its a right to dislike anyone or anything, as long as one doesn't discriminate legally, socially, economically. I never used any word like ALL.
Why should I be afraid of being exposed? I admitted straightaway that I am an ex Muslim & that I don't like many stuff about Islam & the Quran.
-
Again, Pakistan isn't a race, and its a right to dislike anyone or anything, as long as one doesn't discriminate legally, socially, economically. I never used any word like ALL.
A 'pakistani' is a person with a single origin (insofar as 'origin' refers to a demarcated piece of land) and that is pakistan. When you say 'Pakistanis', you have made a sweeping generalising comment and hence you're a racist.
Why should I be afraid of being exposed? I admitted straightaway that I am an ex Muslim & that I don't like many stuff about Islam & the Quran.
Good, so answer the questions above. Refer to this thread reply 176. Here are the questions again
- Do you find the Quran supportive of rejection of hadith?
- These ?objectionable? hadith, by what standards do Quranists reject them?
- Why did YOU become a Quranist?
We'll see if the 10-month Quranist really was
-
You claim that those who leave hadith are desperate to salvage their faith, did you not? Therefore as a person of integrity, I challenge you to show me how desperate I am? Because I don?t believe for a second you were EVER a Quranist. Reading your last paragraph below proves my point.
Ok, that?s reasoning. Other people are entitled to theirs.
Yeah, also don?t forget to tell us how racially deficient Muslims are, to kinda strengthen your point. That really helps keep us sweet.
No, you?re a racist. That?s miles above mere ?name-calling?.
LOL.
Don?t be ridiculous.
I called you out for one reason and one reason only your ATTITUDE. You think Quranists are being apologetic by changing ?beat? to ?separate? and we?re desperate to salvage our faith. THAT?S why I replied to you. I don?t give a monkeys what you reject, that?s your business. But if you?re gonna tell us we?re playing around with the language, you better have something better than ?I spoke to arabs?. That?s the kind of reasoning which would severely cast you into disrepute.
Oh so you found Quranism appealing then? Tell me, why did you say junking hadith is a ?desparate attempt to salvage faith?. Were you one of the desperate then? What arguments did you employ in this desperation?
So now you have no TIME to learn it? I see. A few days ago it was just beneath you. Good change of tactic there.
So tell me, is it a decent thing to do to call Quranists ?apologists? when you don?t know and refuse to learn Arabic? Is that ?rude? you think to call us ?desperate to salvage our faith?? Don?t run from answering this, ok.
Oh so now you have Quranist FAMILY members? Wow?.
And what has your Quranist cousin have to do with me? I never said crap about ?essence of all previous religions?. I don?t use any ?previous? in my engagement with the Quran.
During these 10 months when you became a Quranist, were you comatose? If so, everything would make sense.
What does ease of understanding have to do with correctness of translation? A concept may be easy but there could be a ton of diversionary material covering it. Funny how an ex-QURANIST doesn?t understand this.
Irrrelevant.
Repeat Do not give a monkeys what you are.
Only care that you defend your remarks about Quranists and your views.
Or a self-hating racist who needs to find a fresh, dissociated identity. Kinda like Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs in a manner of speaking.
GOOD. Now we have something to work with. I will counter-interrogate this in my next post. Please go there.I am no racist again, as Islam isn't a race, disliking Islam isn't a crime. Speaking against Islam isn't a crime. Speaking about any Muslim nation isn't a crime either.
As long as I don't make any call for any harassment or deportation, I do have my fredom of speech.
I have seen many(again not ALL) speak against Israel(& India, USA, Britain,even Singapore & Philippines), that doesn't automatically mean they're anti Semites who'd kill Jews given the chance. While I disagree, I don't jump on their throats with the "race" card.
I never claimed that all Muslims who turn Quranists do so to salvage their faith, but I do know plenty like that.
You started off by being rude, why should I reply politely?
It was you who questioned my intelligence & reasoning abilities.
Don't expect politeness when you start off with rudeness.
-
A 'pakistani' is a person with a single origin (insofar as 'origin' refers to a demarcated piece of land) and that is pakistan. When you say 'Pakistanis', you have made a sweeping generalising comment and hence you're a racist.
A demarcated piece of land again isn't analogous to a race, in any case, one can begin a negative statement with Pakistanis, Shias, Sunis, Wahhabis etc.
A statement like "Wahhabis treat women poorly" isn't any reason to call another an evil person.
As far as Pakistani cousin marriaes are concerned, that was the results of numerous surveys. ;D
-
I am no racist again, as Islam isn't a race, disliking Islam isn't a crime. Speaking against Islam isn't a crime. Speaking about any Muslim nation isn't a crime either.
As long as I don't make any call for any harassment or deportation, I do have my fredom of speech.
Once again, you made sweeping statements about people of a certain origin or culture. THAT makes you racist.
Criticising Islam doesnt make u a racist. Get that straight, ok.
No one here wants to take away your right to speak. In fact, it's good that you have that right so the world can see what a racist you are.
I never claimed that all Muslims who turn Quranists do so to salvage their faith, but I do know plenty like that.
When you don't use the qualifier 'some' or whatever, thats EXACTLY what you did. Now are we ready for a change of statement.
Question do you or do you not believe the Quran supports Quran alone doctrine? Yes or no.
You started off by being rude, why should I reply politely?
Who's asking you to be polite? Be rude to me all you want. You being nice doesn't send me to ruptures of divine love, don't worry.
It was you who questioned my intelligence & reasoning abilities.
What intelligence and reasoning abilities? Intelligence implies actually reading and understanding what one is writing. When one simply rejects the study of the LANGUAGE of the text because it's not worth her time, that would make argumentation impossible.
Look at the question about jinn. You couldn't even produce an analysis of the Quran which YOU quoted. At first you even tried to pass off someone else's article as proof of what Quran says? This is 'reasoning ability' only in the widest possible definition of the term.
So my questions await you. No need to be polite, call me anything you like but don't run away.
-
A demarcated piece of land again isn't analogous to a race, in any case, one can begin a negative statement with Pakistanis, Shias, Sunis, Wahhabis etc.
A statement like "Wahhabis treat women poorly" isn't any reason to call another an evil person.
As far as Pakistani cousin marriaes are concerned, that was the results of numerous surveys. ;D
A 'race' is a construct. You need to do some reading. Do you know at one point, even the Irish weren't considered 'white'? Then they were included into it for political reasons (to overcome ethnic minorities in America, apparently). In the same way, 'Pakistani' wasn't a race before Pakistan was formed but now it is and you made a sweeping statement about ALL of them. That makes u a 'racist'.
Don't be deluded into thinking race is biological, ok. Find out the origins of Boris Johnson and you'll see how ephemeral the whole notion is.