Challenge to all rejectors of the Divinity of Al-Quraan : Moderated Debates

unknownuser

enq shirked away again

Please enq, don't aske me any more question if you will not address my replys and just shirk away

unknownuser

stop whining guys, all foirums like this and in fact this is far more quiter forum, it seems becauise you can't handle me and mquran you guys trying to defame us indorectly

your sick plan won't work becaiuse me and Mquran are united to defend our Quran unlike many double faced and hyupocrite muslims

unknownuser

Peace ab. I have reported the language and hostility of you and mquran to the moderators...You really need to learn how to talk respectfully to people,you two...
I wish you luck in reforming your language and attitudes...I wish reform and peace to all humanity...

unknownuser

Yeh that iks what you can do, if the moederators feels I have brokmen any rule and want to ban me, fine I will take like a man, then I will serve my time and come back to you to save other innocent humans from being mislead by you and the likes of you

now leave it to the moderators and donl;t direct any comment to me, but any non sensible comment that you say about the Quran outside the moderated debates will always give me the right to respond to it and I will always reserve that right

now you should stop crying and get into it and show us how you can twist the Quran words and say see it is human

unknownuser

Peace be upon you all,

I just poked my head in here to see what was going on, I only looked at the last two pages. I would have thought a debate was going on by now. Anyway, I am honored to be asked to moderate, but I dont know how often I will be required to be online to do so and I cant be certain how often I will be online. But I will help in any way I can.

I just hope that some of us would grow up and stop playing Holy Warrior and learn to have civilized conversation. I do agree that Wakas and Enquirer would be a nice debate that we could all learn from in terms of intelligence and character by both of them. But I dont want to put any pressure on anyone to debate. I am fine without it also.

agentxxx

peace Idolfree1,

I just hope that some of us would grow up and stop playing Holy Warrior and learn to have civilized conversation.

;D bravo

God bless you,
Peace.

phoenix1

peace all,

I reject that Idolfree or and phonix be moderators for these debate, soimply because one don't believe in the Quran and the other doubts its integrity

Ahmed, I disagree with you that the integrity of the Quran lies in the belief that it is divine.

Peace wakas. Two seperate points we can debate,either;

How literalism creates contradictions in the quranic text... Or,
Are the quranic laws relevant for all times,or only the 'spirit/'implied morality' of these laws?

I was thinking about something similar the other day. About what I call "superficial tradition/laws". offtopic
When we look at traditions, we shouldn't look at what people before us did, but why they did it. It is always the why that is more important than the what.
For example, Chrysler built Hemi engines back in the 60s, not because it was a great popular engine in the past, but because it was one of the best designs (this info might be inaccurate). The hemi (hemispherical cylinder heads) was the latest technology. Today, Chrysler has turned making Hemis their tradition. They made Hemis in the past, they are making them again, and will continue making them. But they are only looking at WHAt Chrysler made in the past, instead of WHY. Why did they make hemis? because they were one of the best engines.
So to me, tradition wouldn't be making Hemi engines, but building engines which have the latest technology in them. That would be following the true spirit of Chrysler engineers of the past.
Hope you undersood the above (I can give more examples!)

I think view on tradition can also be applied to Quranic laws. It can go two ways

the specific laws are not important, but the "why" of those laws, the spirit of those laws is. So although we can change the laws, we cannot change what those laws stand for. So changing the punishment of adultery is OK as long as it accomplishes the same thing.
we must follow every law exactly, but we must apply the reason behind those laws into other things as well. Like if eating pig meat is bad, then whatever resembles pig meat must also be bad.

either way, our following of those laws cannot be superficial.

unknownuser

peace all,

Ahmed, I disagree with you that the integrity of the Quran lies in the belief that it is divine.

Ok mate

KGB

peace all,

Ahmed, I disagree with you that the integrity of the Quran lies in the belief that it is divine.

Ok mate

Really did not understand. You went very strong on Anwar and letting this go away so easily. Yes integrity of Qur'an depends on each and every word because its divine. Words of Allah Subhana wa Taala.

phoenix1

peace KGB,

again, you made no effort to understand what I was saying.
I said the integrety of the Quran does not depend on the belief that it is divine.

unknownuser

peace all,

Ahmed, I disagree with you that the integrity of the Quran lies in the belief that it is divine.

Ok mate

Really did not understand. You went very strong on Anwar and letting this go away so easily. Yes integrity of Qur'an depends on each and every word because its divine. Words of Allah Subhana wa Taala.

I just had enough bro

Peace

mquran

Guys, I couldn't help laughing when I saw this. I usually don't find such things funny but omnious but today, the sheer predictability of it made me burst out laughing. Check out Enquirer's post below

How literalism creates contradictions in the quranic text... Or,
Are the quranic laws relevant for all times,or only the 'spirit/'implied morality' of these laws?
My opinion is that literalism creates contradictions,so one has to resort to 'justifications' to correct these contradictions....
My opinion is that the quranic laws are not relevent for all times,and only some of the underlying morality is needed for todays society....
Im open to any topics you,or anyone else wants to dicuss...

If anyone debates him, ask him the following
Point 1

Please define literalism.
Under whose authority is 'literalism' defined.
Why should al-quraan conform to that authority.

Point 2

How does one extricate the 'moral' of a particular punishment?
If al-quraan says to CRUCIFY mischief-maker, does this mean we put a fake cross on him and make him walk around?
Under whose authority is 'literalism' transposed over 'metaphoricism'?

I promise you, Mr Enquirer will not answer these questions. Why ? Because like his predecessing critics, he will then expose his true intention.

I am not,repeat am not,an enemy of quran...But i dislike the quran being used for justifying human oppression....My aim is not to win this dicussion,or prove my ego...But to increase understanding of these topics,so we can benefit the forum,and benefit humanity....Which im sure we can unite on...
Peace all.

lol, sure

Elke

Peace all,

the underneath doesn't make me laugh at all, and mquran, you're reaction is just as predictable...as mine and enquirers

Quote from enq

How literalism creates contradictions in the quranic text... Or,
Are the quranic laws relevant for all times,or only the 'spirit/'implied morality' of these laws?
My opinion is that literalism creates contradictions,so one has to resort to 'justifications' to correct these contradictions....
My opinion is that the quranic laws are not relevent for all times,and only some of the underlying morality is needed for todays society....
Im open to any topics you,or anyone else wants to dicuss...

(which doesn't mean that i share enq's views 100 % as i believe that more than some of the underlying morality is needed ))

PM
We have had enough battle of egos in the forum lately.

I think a Moderated debate on Quran's authenticity by wakas and enquirer will be good, constructive and also peaceful.

Peace!

i would also like to add that a debate on these aspects does not, imo, imply that it is on the authenticity or divinity (or divine origin whatever u call it) of quran

even sunny sunnis use ijtihad...do we quran aloners have to go back to the stone age brickwall

elke

mquran

Elke the underneath doesn't make me laugh at all, and mquran, you're reaction is just as predictable...as mine and enquirers

Sure, discussions always follow a mathematical pattern of logic.

My opinion is that literalism creates contradictions,so one has to resort to 'justifications' to correct these contradictions....

I see. Would you care to give examples?

My opinion is that the quranic laws are not relevent for all times,and only some of the underlying morality is needed for todays society....

What criteria do you employ to make this judgement?

Let me rephrase You say Law X is no longer relevant. What has changed to render Law X not relevant.

i would also like to add that a debate on these aspects does not, imo, imply that it is on the authenticity or divinity (or divine origin whatever u call it) of quran

IYO , perhaps not but according to al-quraan, it's laws are for humanity without qualification (i.e all place and time). So ipso facto by saying some of its laws arent relevant, quranically you are calling into question its authenticity. Once again, this is a THEORETICAL discussion and nothing personal is implied.

Elke

Dear mquran

first of all I was quoting U quoting enquirer... at least for the second and third quote

and you know that i do not want to discuss this matter with you because i do not think it possible to come to reasonable terms

you will not convince me, i'll not convince you

if i tell you that i cannot accept the idea of applying some of the quranic law as prescribed in quran - speaking specifically of lashing "adulterers" as we already talked - you'll tell me that i'm not "islamic", you already did and i'm not ready to take this from you, nor anbybody else

why first of all what exactly is zina adultery, fornication, pornographie ??? There must have been a definition at the time of the revelation and the society was i think ready to apply that kind of punishment - which might even have been salutary then...

but i have a lot of trust in god, so much trust in god that i believe in an ongoing revelation, as i live it myself for about 20 years. and i do not believe that what was read and understood 1400 years ago, must be read and understood today

three month period after divorce for women... for me this is not valid anymore as today one can have a pregnancy test... and if it's not for pregnancy but for STD, why would the waiting be only for the women ?
I actually evolved on that coz when i left my husband i waited for over nine month before assuming relation with my beloved one, the one i left my husband for.... not "officially" divorced yet - i wanted to do it in a clean manner, waiting period included aso, but realized on the way that the cards were biaised - actually, my official divorce, which could have taken place in three month if my ex had asked for it, happened 3 years later...so was i an adulteress in your eyes during all this time ? While by the way my ex was remarried three month after i left... thanks to the possibility of polygamy...and for sure he was no adulterer as he was legally married

ok, you'll tell me that this is not quaranic spirit and i share that idea, but unfortunately this is what happens in real life

all this does not change a thing in my eyes about the morality underlying these laws. But what are laws for ? Blind application or education ? Education as to make understand that something is immoral ? The prophets people at the time did not have these notions i guess, and yes nowadays some don't either, but nearly everyone has thougth about it, made up his/her opinion, chosen his path. Did god give these laws in this time to be applied forvever. Did he clearly state this ? you say it's laws are for humanity without qualification of place and time. i say the morals are for all ... may be this is a malformation of a lawyer - as in law you have either the litteral (yours) or the systemic, the historical, the teleological ...interpretation of laws. really don't have the time now to explain all these to you, may be you can look this up, if you're not familiar with the terms.

Now if you want to base yourself on quran alone, life is not quran alone to me, god gave us many other thing, hearing, eyesight, brains, universe
May be i've become to personal in my explanations, but this did it for me. It's during these last years that i started questionning my practizes, reading the quran critically - meaning not only saying, you have to accept , it's from god, but wondering what the rules were for. and that's were it got me
god will judge me on this.

peace lk

mquran

Elkefirst of all I was quoting U quoting enquirer... at least for the second and third quote

Ah sorry, my mistake.

and you know that i do not want to discuss this matter with you because i do not think it possible to come to reasonable terms

Fine.

you will not convince me, i'll not convince you

How good of you to speak on my behalf.

if i tell you that i cannot accept the idea of applying some of the quranic law as prescribed in quran - speaking specifically of lashing "adulterers" as we already talked - you'll tell me that i'm not "islamic", you already did and i'm not ready to take this from you, nor anbybody else

Whatever you do and do not accept has nothing to do with me. What I seek for is JUSTIFICATION of your views as per al-quraan. 'i cannot accept the idea' isn't a conceptual justification for me, so its invalid in my sphere of existence. However, nowhere have I called you 'kafir' or otherwise. I don't even know you.

why first of all what exactly is zina adultery, fornication, pornographie There must have been a definition at the time of the revelation and the society was i think ready to apply that kind of punishment - which might even have been salutary then...

Wow, how do you know all this?

but i have a lot of trust in god, so much trust in god that i believe in an ongoing revelation, as i live it myself for about 20 years. and i do not believe that what was read and understood 1400 years ago, must be read and understood today

Good for you. Good luck.

three month period after divorce for women... for me this is not valid anymore as today one can have a pregnancy test... and if it's not for pregnancy but for STD, why would the waiting be only for the women ?
I actually evolved on that coz when i left my husband i waited for over nine month before assuming relation with my beloved one, the one i left my husband for.... not "officially" divorced yet - i wanted to do it in a clean manner, waiting period included aso, but realized on the way that the cards were biaised - actually, my official divorce, which could have taken place in three month if my ex had asked for it, happened 3 years later...so was i an adulteress in your eyes during all this time ? While by the way my ex was remarried three month after i left... thanks to the possibility of polygamy...and for sure he was no adulterer as he was legally married

Ok, what would you like me to do with this tale? If you're not discussing anything with me, that is?

ok, you'll tell me that this is not quaranic spirit and i share that idea, but unfortunately this is what happens in real life

Is this a monolog or a conversation? You seem to be speaking on my behalf a lot.

all this does not change a thing in my eyes about the morality underlying these laws. But what are laws for ? Blind application or education ? Education as to make understand that something is immoral ? The prophets people at the time did not have these notions i guess, and yes nowadays some don't either, but nearly everyone has thougth about it, made up his/her opinion, chosen his path. Did god give these laws in this time to be applied forvever. Did he clearly state this ? you say it's laws are for humanity without qualification of place and time. i say the morals are for all ... may be this is a malformation of a lawyer - as in law you have either the litteral (yours) or the systemic, the historical, the teleological ...interpretation of laws. really don't have the time now to explain all these to you, may be you can look this up, if you're not familiar with the terms.

Actually, He did clearly state this al-quraan for humankind for all place and time yes. For you to have to ask this shows the same quality of research which you did for the inheritance issue. Once again, its your business but if you criticise al-quraan in a public forum, some people might find you wrong, especially if you miss out critical information.

Now if you want to base yourself on quran alone, life is not quran alone to me, god gave us many other thing, hearing, eyesight, brains, universe

Once again, your demarcation of al-quraan and 'hearing,eyesight'brains' shows (im sorry to say) lack of research. And once again, your business.

May be i've become to personal in my explanations, but this did it for me. It's during these last years that i started questionning my practizes, reading the quran critically - meaning not only saying, you have to accept , it's from god, but wondering what the rules were for. and that's were it got me
god will judge me on this.

God will judge everyone. You're happy in your beliefs, that's fine. I retain my view of your research which I consider shoddy and I apologise, that's my perception. Good luck in your path.

arnoldyasin

Peace,

Sorry for the intruding, and sorry elke if it wasn't your intention to discuss this, if it was not, then ignore my post please

As for the punishment, it says hit the skin, but the word used refers to that we cannot brake the skin. So by my best understanding, it has a metaphorical meaning, and never refered to real whipping. But public humilation.

242 The adulteress and the adulterer, flog each one of them with a hundred stripes. And let not compassion sway you in their case from carrying out Allah?s Law, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of believers witness the penalty. .

Quote
three month period after divorce for women... for me this is not valid anymore as today one can have a pregnancy test... and if it's not for pregnancy but for STD, why would the waiting be only for the women ?

Not all pregnancy tests are 100% perfect, but then still we have DNA tests, so i understand what you are saying. So i agree we have to look a bit closer to this one, but still no reason to disclose it. Also you have to keep in mind that 80% of the people on earth don't have money for a pregnancy test.

Quote
I actually evolved on that coz when i left my husband i waited for over nine month before assuming relation with my beloved one, the one i left my husband for.... not "officially" divorced yet - i wanted to do it in a clean manner, waiting period included aso, but realized on the way that the cards were biaised - actually, my official divorce, which could have taken place in three month if my ex had asked for it, happened 3 years later

You asked for divorce, then after the waiting period it is over. Have witnesses that confirm the divorce date, then there is no problem that the legal work is late, as these has nothing to do with the real islamic divorce. So the fornication doesn't apply at all here.

Quote
While by the way my ex was remarried three month after i left... thanks to the possibility of polygamy

This is the biggest lie of the tradition. Nikaa means contract/mixing/combining, and doesn't mean marriage throughout the Quran. So with the 4 women, it is directly refered them being poor and them having kids, and by thus giving the nikaa the meaning of social contracts to take care of them. As the prophet was the trustholder of the public money as the booty-verse gives, then this is the clear reason he got 11 'wives', they were not married to him, but he had contracts with them to take care of them, as he could disperse the money in a correct way. Polygamy doesn't occur in the Quran. This is one of the things that has to be rectified.

These things has nothing to do with interpretation but with the direct use of classic arabic and our glasses when we approach the Quran. You will probably have more problems with some other verses, but every problem people have with the Quran, are not real problems, but understanding-mistakes.

Sorry for the intruding, but i saw your examples, which i had a simple answer for....only the waiting period i'm still checking...These are my best understandings and really logical in my eyes.

Peace all

Elke

Peace arnold

thanx for your post - don't mind discussing these - i was the one mentionning things in the first place

but may be you could also tell me what is zina to you ? Not here though - wrong place

what you said does not come as a surprise to me as it reflects my views and understanding - divorce, waiting period... hope this doesn't include you in my "shoddy" research group never heard that word before...

peace mquran

Quote
you will not convince me, i'll not convince you

How good of you to speak on my behalf.

ok, i was looking for that one...

nowhere you told me that i was a kafir, but to tell someone that his views are "unislamic" is not far away, and that's what you did.

but if you criticise al-quraan in a public forum,

i dont criticise quran, i read and understand it differently sometimes

for the rest of your post i find your tone - as usual - inappropriate.
Pity, may be you could make a lot of good points and convince people if you only learned how to bring them over without sounding insulting.

Once again, your demarcation of al-quraan and 'hearing,eyesight'brains' shows (im sorry to say) lack of research.

what do you mean by demarcation ? really most times you're just looking for the little beast (freely translated from french but i guess you'll get what i mean)

lk

mquran

Elkenowhere you told me that i was a kafir, but to tell someone that his views are "unislamic" is not far away, and that's what you did.

Once again, you need to look at the phraseology of al-quraan. Someone doesn't become something for holding a certain views. Your view is 'unislamic' to me, sure but I don't know of your general conduct etc. How am I to know what knowledge has come to you? I don't, not at all because and let me say this clearly I DO NOT IN REAL LIFE KNOW YOU.

I dont criticise quran, i read and understand it differently sometimes

A critique isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'll use the word 'air your views'.

for the rest of your post i find your tone - as usual - inappropriate.
Pity, may be you could make a lot of good points and convince people if you only learned how to bring them over without sounding insulting.

Ok. Of course the possibility that you're oversensitive isn't ever in question, right?

what do you mean by demarcation ? really most times you're just looking for the little beast (freely translated from french but i guess you'll get what i mean)

If you explain how 'im just looking for the little beast' , I'll explain what I mean.

Elke

peace mquran

Of course the possibility that you're oversensitive isn't ever in question, right?

may be i am, but i don't seem to be the only one when it comes to you

lk