Religion, what's the point?

frostbite said:
For me as a non-Muslim, the differences between interpretations are completely meaningless
Click to expand...

Well, I wasn’t arguing that they’re meaningless, just that we can’t take a position on them in order to determine whether or not someone or something can be considered “Islamic.” That’s not our call. However I’d say that understanding the different ways Islam has manifested in place and time is absolutely vital if we want to understand the ways it has shaped the lives of a considerable portion of humanity.

frostbite said:
Studying the Quran is like studying a "Nigerian letter". Because the whole situation is very simple: Muhammand's "mission" was a scam.
Click to expand...

Whatever you want to believe about what exactly happened in the early 7th century Middle East (and there are lots of interesting theories that have been produced by genuinely sincere and empathetic scholarship), the phenomenon given to us at that particular moment has birthed civilizations, shaped cultures, given meaning to the lives of diverse peoples of all ethnicities and languages for fifteen centuries or so. To reduce it all to a “scam” I think is to turn your back on a significant part of what it has meant to be human in history.
 
frostbite said:
You don't understand the question because you grew up in the West and you accept that religion is a personal thing. Like being gay is a personal thing. However, many people in muslim-dominated countries do not think this way, they don't accept that religion is a personal thing. Or that being gay is a personal thing. (And it was like that in the West 500 years ago, too.)
Click to expand...
It’s a nonsensical question. Have you been to a Muslim dominated country? Or even one with a sizeable Muslim population?

Tarring 1.5bn people worldwide with the same brush is an idiotic way to make any real assertions about anything. Muslims aren't one homogenous group that all behave and think the same.

There’s cultural Muslims, atheists in Muslim countries, secular Muslims, etc etc. I've met Muslims in Mauritius that partake in Hindu festivals, and the Hindu counterparts partake in Muslim traditions.
 
Grylte said:
Does Sweden count?
Click to expand...
Count as what? A Muslim dominant country, or one with a sizeable population? I wouldn't say so but I have no idea what % they make of Sweden's total population.
 
The Corinthian said:
Count as what? A Muslim dominant country, or one with a sizeable population? I wouldn't say so but I have no idea what % they make of Sweden's total population.
Click to expand...

He's trying to be funny, you know funny in the kind of way where everyone else rolls their eyes and sighs. Some idiots think that us pure true white proper Swedes along with our culture and traditions are being replaced by Muslims in the same way white idiots in the US think they're being replaced by brown people.
 
Zlaatan said:
He's trying to be funny, you know funny in the kind of way where everyone else rolls their eyes and sighs. Some idiots think that us pure true white proper Swedes along with our culture and traditions are being replaced by Muslims in the same way white idiots in the US think they're being replaced by brown people.
Click to expand...

I guess i was kind of joking, but i know Sweden has had some problems with immigration, especially from muslim countries.
I have no connection to Sweden apart from visiting once roughly every 5th year to buy cheap snus and alcohol just over the border.
It's just things i've read and seen online, Rinkeby to mention one thing.
 
Zlaatan said:
He's trying to be funny, you know funny in the kind of way where everyone else rolls their eyes and sighs. Some idiots think that us pure true white proper Swedes along with our culture and traditions are being replaced by Muslims in the same way white idiots in the US think they're being replaced by brown people.
Click to expand...
Got you...the 'joke' went over my head.
 
The Corinthian said:
Got you...the 'joke' went over my head.
Click to expand...

Forgot to say in my previous post that that's not what i meant.
The part about Swedes being replaced etc.

I have really no clue about what's going on in Sweden, just that i have seen many complaints online.
 
The Corinthian said:
It’s a nonsensical question. Have you been to a Muslim dominated country? Or even one with a sizeable Muslim population?

Tarring 1.5bn people worldwide with the same brush is an idiotic way to make any real assertions about anything. Muslims aren't one homogenous group that all behave and think the same.

There’s cultural Muslims, atheists in Muslim countries, secular Muslims, etc etc. I've met Muslims in Mauritius that partake in Hindu festivals, and the Hindu counterparts partake in Muslim traditions.
Click to expand...

Which question? This question?

What should a good Muslim do when someone (like me) is an open, 100 percent atheist who says that all religions are lies and scams?

This is a question about Islam, the religion. The religion is one, even if it has a lot of branches and different interpretations. I wasn't asking what a particular muslim will do. I was asking what the "archetypal", "good Muslim" should do, according to their holy writings and the core teachings of Islam.

It is like asking: should a "good Muslim" drink alcohol? According to Islam, he should not. In real life many do, but that's not what Islam is teaching.

Here is a link to the original question for those who missed it:
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/religion-whats-the-point.215250/page-340#post-29325648
 
frostbite said:
Since we have people who have read the Quran, I have a question:

What should a good Muslim do when someone (like me) is an open, 100 percent atheist who says that all religions are lies and scams?

I know that the Bible is not very tolerant towards atheists. But I have no idea what the Quran says and what a good, faithful Muslim is supposed to do.


(Of course, I know that a Muslim in California is fine with atheists, but they are also fine with alcohol, gays, gay parades, divorce, sex outside marriage, abortion, and many other things that are not allowed in many Muslim-dominated countries. It is always true that, in practise, what people do and what their religion says, is not the same thing. Here, my question is about what Islam, the religion, says about atheists, not what *you* personally think it is the proper thing to do. )
Click to expand...

We can’t give you what you want. You see Islam as software used to program humans. You are asking for a command /if/atheist/nearby. It doesn’t work like that. Atheist don’t practice religion and tend to be very abstract. Islam is about living a conscious life. About context and direction. Your question is childish.
 
2cents said:
What I’ve found interesting recently is reading of cases where Jews and Christians sometimes made use of Islamic courts, under the Mamluks and Ottomans, and in Yemen. Sometimes because they could potentially obtain a more favorable ruling from the Islamic court, other times because there was no sure way to have the rulings of their own religious courts enforced.
Click to expand...

This is the thing that the case of the Jewish tribe who were sentenced to death that is very much misunderstood by many.

The Jewish tribes were saying that they wouldn't get justice if a Muslim was the judge. They were asked to pick a judge and chose a guy from their own tribe who used the Jewish punishment of death for them. Now the guy they chose was a Muslim at this time having converted. But he was well versed in Jewish law. So they were tried according to their own scriptures and judged by those too.
 
frostbite said:
Since we have people who have read the Quran, I have a question:

What should a good Muslim do when someone (like me) is an open, 100 percent atheist who says that all religions are lies and scams?

I know that the Bible is not very tolerant towards atheists. But I have no idea what the Quran says and what a good, faithful Muslim is supposed to do.


(Of course, I know that a Muslim in California is fine with atheists, but they are also fine with alcohol, gays, gay parades, divorce, sex outside marriage, abortion, and many other things that are not allowed in many Muslim-dominated countries. It is always true that, in practise, what people do and what their religion says, is not the same thing. Here, my question is about what Islam, the religion, says about atheists, not what *you* personally think it is the proper thing to do. )
Click to expand...


The general rule is there is no compulsion in faith. A person is free to believe what they want. Punishment kicks in if they start causing harm or mischief.

Even homosexuality is not something which is punishable if it isn't public and open. Now that sounds like it's discrimination towards homosexuals however the rulings are the same for heterosexuals and married couples etc.

If a person accuses somebody of homosexuality and hasn't got the witnesses to prove say intercourse the accuser gets punished. Which interestingly is why Oscar Wilde was imprisoned. It wasn't his sexuality but his accusation towards that bloke whose name I forget.
 
2mufc0 said:
Furthermore, the person who wrote the commentary/interpretation of the hadith added a lot of things that hadith didn't say, it was quite bizzare. It seems they were writing what they wanted to hear rather than what it said.
Click to expand...

Roane said:
This is what happens on these type of sites. They may add or detract a part of a hadith etc and completely change the meaning. Sites like answering Islam are notorious for this. They reference a hadith or a verse from the Qur'an or even a scholar but do it in such a way that it is basically incitement.

A good example is the "kill them where you find them" quote. It's portrayed as a verse ordering to kill all non Muslims. And yes the line is in the Qur'an. Yet it's one line in a whole Surah. Once you read the whole Surah you realise it's specific to a specific time in war. Where it tells you to treat those who surrender with respect and give them safe passage. Don't harm them in any way. The line of killing them only applies to those who surrender, are fed and looked after, given safe passage but once out of danger attack you and kill your people. It's not a general order towards all non Muslims.
Click to expand...

I believe they didn't reference Ibn Ishaq where the rest of the story is. Kenana al-Rabi is Safiya's husband. Now ask yourself how Safiya would have felt after Muhammed tortured and murdered her husband as the below hadith dipicts. Do you think as a 17 year old girl she willingly married his murderer who was 60? Or do you think she was fearful for her future as Muhammed's slave? We know the Quran states you can rape women you own anyway. I think we can certainly state most sane women would not want to have a marriage with a man who tortured and murdered their husband who most reasonable women are supposed to have some loyalty towards.

See the evidence below:


Ibn Ishaq writes about Kenana ibn al-Rabi:

Kenana al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of Banu Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came (Tabari says "was brought"), to the apostle and said that he had seen Kenana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kenana, "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" He said "Yes". The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has." So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud
Click to expand...
In addition to Ibn Ishaq's narration Al-Tabari writes:

The Prophet gave orders concerning Kenana to Zubayr, saying, ‘Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kenana’s chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kenana was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him. -- Al-Tabari, Vol. 8, p. 122
Click to expand...
 
Gehrman said:
"O believers! Whoever among you abandons their faith, Allah will replace them with others who love Him and are loved by Him. They will be humble with the believers but firm towards the disbelievers, struggling in the Way of Allah; fearing no blame from anyone. This is the favour of Allah. He grants it to whoever He wills. And Allah is All-Bountiful, All-Knowing."

Roane i'm not quite clear on how this Surah 5:54 illuminates what muslims should do about apostates. Perhaps something is lost in translation or i'm not reading it correctly. This is just from Quran.com. The main I gather from it is that apostates will replaced by people who are humble towards believers and firm towards disbelievers. I don't really feel it tells us anymore than that on this topic unless I'm missing something?
Click to expand...


All surahs from the Qur'an have what is called tafsir. This is the detail of when it was revealed, what was happening at the time, if it was specific to that time or event or general etc.

As I understand it it basically, in my words, says if they leave the religion leave them to it as Allah will replace them with even better Muslims. Or to that effect.

The problem as I see with translations is that the people who translated them, Ali, pickthall etc were educated people who used bigger, longer words when the actual words can be understood by someone illiterate (but speaks Arabic).

Also there is the issue of words that have general meanings but also have specific meanings that are only that in terms of the religion.

So for example bidah means innovation. However in terms of Qur'an it means innovation in the Deen specifically. So where we pray 4 fardh as ordered you can't pray 5 as that takes it outside Islam. Or Ismailis who reduced the prayer and Qur'an, automatically become non muslim.

Yet generally the word is used in the context of innovation in terms of a new idea etc. So you get people who say if bidah is wrong why do you fly or use a computer as they didn't exist in the Prophets time. They use to justify their innovation in the faith.

If that makes sense?
 
Last edited:
ThinkTank@Cafe said:
You see Islam as software used to program humans. You are asking for a command /if/atheist/nearby.
Click to expand...
That's exactly how it works, as admitted by every religious person in the world. You decide to read a 1000 year old book and do every single thing that it says, regardless of whether it makes any sense or not.

e.g. If anyone was born and left to observe this world by themselves with zero external influence, there's no reason whatsoever that anyone would ever come up with nonsensical concepts like the afterlife, heaven, hell and whatever else is written in these books. But because this got written into a book by some guy whose sole motive was to come up with every possible notion that would instil fear in people reading it (like going to hell) they now have no issues in living their lives according to something completely made up - you know - like a machine executes a code...
 
ThierryFabregas said:
I believe they didn't reference Ibn Ishaq where the rest of the story is. Kenana al-Rabi is Safiya's husband. Now ask yourself how Safiya would have felt after Muhammed tortured and murdered her husband as the below hadith dipicts. Do you think as a 17 year old girl she willingly married his murderer who was 60? Or do you think she was fearful for her future as Muhammed's slave? We know the Quran states you can rape women you own anyway. I think we can certainly state most sane women would not want to have a marriage with a man who tortured and murdered their husband who most reasonable women are supposed to have some loyalty towards.

See the evidence below:


Ibn Ishaq writes about Kenana ibn al-Rabi:


In addition to Ibn Ishaq's narration Al-Tabari writes:
Click to expand...


She was 17 when she married her second husband kenana. She had been married and divorced before.

Kenana also was the reason she had a scar on her face where he had hit her before the war.

The killing of her people was done by Saad ibn Muad, who they had themselves chosen as the judge to judge them according to Jewish law.

Saffiyah was offered her freedom and marriage and she accepted. However she said no to consumption of the marriage until later. When asked why she said she feared for Muhammad as the Jews were near the place.

It's worth noting that Muslim and non Muslim literature from that time period paints a very different picture from what we know now.

So for example it was common practise for two warring tribes to take the women of the chiefs etc of the losers. This was so common that the women would literally "doll themselves up" so if their tribe lost they would look appealing to the top men of the winning tribe. I'm not talking Islam here. Just some of the practices before and during the early years.
 
Moby said:
That's exactly how it works, as admitted by every religious person in the world. You decide to read a 1000 year old book and do every single thing that it says, regardless of whether it makes any sense or not.

e.g. If anyone was born and left to observe this world by themselves with zero external influence, there's no reason whatsoever that anyone would ever come up with nonsensical concepts like the afterlife, heaven, hell and whatever else is written in these books. But because this got written into a book by some guy whose sole motive was to come up with every possible notion that would instil fear in people reading it (like going to hell) they now have no issues in living their lives according to something completely made up - you know - like a machine executes a code...
Click to expand...

Don't get this. At some point someone was born and left to observe the world by themselves but chose religion/s.

If as atheists/non believers you believe these are man made/written then surely man left alone observed and thought we need to worship an entity and have rules etc?
 
Roane said:
The Qur'an doesn't state that the earth is flat. Never has. And yeah I welcome any mistakes you can point out.
Click to expand...

Okay the Quran states that they made earth a bed and spread it out. Spreading implies something flat. It certainly sounds the opposite of how you would create a sphere.

The Quran states Allah used mountains as pegs or spikes into the earth. (Quran 74:6/7) We know this is factually wrong. The mountains were not added after the earth was 'spread'

The Quran states the Earth was made by Allah and then he created the 7 heavens above earth. Which is what the Sumerians believed. It also states there is 7 earths. Bukhari claims on the day of judgement the 7 earths are below us and we will sink down to them on the day of judgement. This is flat world talk.

The Quran states 'we adorned the nearest heaven with stars as protection' (The Quran 41/12)

The Quran states 'we created the earth and life in 4 days. Allah created the heavens in 2 days'. (The Quran 41/9-12) So we're supposed to believe that earth and life on earth was created before stars that are millions of years older? And we're supposed to believe it took 4 days to create the earth yet it took 2 days to create the rest of the vastness of the universe.

For me the last point is obviously shows the Quran is of human creation and completely wrong

Furthermore the Quran talks about stars being able to fall upon us (67:5, 81:2)

Allah stops the sky from falling on the earth (22:65)

Quran says before the earth was created everything was water (11:7) and (Bukhari 4:54:414)
 
Roane said:
Don't get this. At some point someone was born and left to observe the world by themselves but chose religion/s.

If as atheists/non believers you believe these are man made/written then surely man left alone observed and thought we need to worship an entity and have rules etc?
Click to expand...
Do you believe religion was the institution that first came up with rules, morals, etc.?
 
Moby said:
Fixed.
Click to expand...

Fine let's take your fixed version. However it goes to show that the initial point I was responding to is strange. Man left to his own devices created religions as in plural (your fixed point) so why would he not do it again if left alone?
 
Roane said:
She was 17 when she married her second husband kenana. She had been married and divorced before.

Kenana also was the reason she had a scar on her face where he had hit her before the war.

The killing of her people was done by Saad ibn Muad, who they had themselves chosen as the judge to judge them according to Jewish law.

Saffiyah was offered her freedom and marriage and she accepted. However she said no to consumption of the marriage until later. When asked why she said she feared for Muhammad as the Jews were near the place.

It's worth noting that Muslim and non Muslim literature from that time period paints a very different picture from what we know now.

So for example it was common practise for two warring tribes to take the women of the chiefs etc of the losers. This was so common that the women would literally "doll themselves up" so if their tribe lost they would look appealing to the top men of the winning tribe. I'm not talking Islam here. Just some of the practices before and during the early years.
Click to expand...

Do you have any daleel for any of your claims?

Either way, Muhammed is meant to be the seal of the prophets and perfect man and ideal model for Muslims. How can you claim that and be at peace with him extorting and murdering a man for his possessions? And then not have an issue with him subjegating a grieving widow, after he killed her husband, to essentially be his sex slave with no choice to be a free woman who isn't raped by Muhammed. There isn't this choice of being free unless she subjegates herself to be Muhammed's wife, where he essentially owns her as a sex slave. Imagine how she must feel having to be intimate with a man who killed her husband. It's revolting and disgusting.

If I told you your brother was tortored for his wealth and murdered and then he had his wife taken from him by his murderer, how would you feel about this murderer? Would you consider him the ideal human?
 
ThierryFabregas said:
Okay the Quran states that they made earth a bed and spread it out. Spreading implies something flat. It certainly sounds the opposite of how you would create a sphere.

The Quran states Allah used mountains as pegs or spikes into the earth. (Quran 74:6/7) We know this is factually wrong. The mountains were not added after the earth was 'spread'

The Quran states the Earth was made by Allah and then he created the 7 heavens above earth. Which is what the Sumerians believed. It also states there is 7 earths. Bukhari claims on the day of judgement the 7 earths are below us and we will sink down to them on the day of judgement. This is flat world talk.

The Quran states 'we adorned the nearest heaven with stars as protection' (The Quran 41/12)

The Quran states 'we created the earth and life in 4 days. Allah created the heavens in 2 days'. (The Quran 41/9-12) So we're supposed to believe that earth and life on earth was created before stars that are millions of years older? And we're supposed to believe it took 4 days to create the earth yet it took 2 days to create the rest of the vastness of the universe.

For me the last point is obviously shows the Quran is of human creation and completely wrong

Furthermore the Quran talks about stars being able to fall upon us (67:5, 81:2)

Allah stops the sky from falling on the earth (22:65)

Quran says before the earth was created everything was water (11:7) and (Bukhari 4:54:414)
Click to expand...

That's an interesting take but not really accurate from what I've read in the Qur'an.

For one the days you speak of isn't days as in Monday to Friday. It isn't in the Bible either incidentally.

The explanation is more eras than days. So 1 day could be a thousand/million years as we know them.


Secondly the verses in the Qur'an are twofold. One verse describes the earth as spread out or flat for those walking it and the every n xr describes it as egg shaped or spherical. Even early scholars argued against the Roman held.view of a flat earth. The word yukawirru is linguistically related to the word ball. Likes of ibn hazim always argued this.

The mountains issue is not about a flat earth rather the role of the mountains and stability and them being long below the surface not just want you see above. The rest then is often describing the day of judgement specifically not what mountains are or do generally. Context needs to be applied here.

You quoted Surah 67:5. Which is Surah Mulk. That particular verse was in response to the claims of the soothsayers of the time and it's more about meteorites than stars.

Surah 41:12 is Surah fussilat and tbh it would take too long to respond to that point as it needs to be understood in context of at least 8 other Surah verses.
 
Moby said:
That's exactly how it works, as admitted by every religious person in the world. You decide to read a 1000 year old book and do every single thing that it says, regardless of whether it makes any sense or not.

e.g. If anyone was born and left to observe this world by themselves with zero external influence, there's no reason whatsoever that anyone would ever come up with nonsensical concepts like the afterlife, heaven, hell and whatever else is written in these books. But because this got written into a book by some guy whose sole motive was to come up with every possible notion that would instil fear in people reading it (like going to hell) they now have no issues in living their lives according to something completely made up - you know - like a machine executes a code...
Click to expand...
It is just your opinion, man. You see it very rational I see it as extremely judgemental and derogatory.
I can’t prove that God exists and you can’t prove the opposite. So, it’s matter of choice. Why atheists are so aggressive and think all other people are dumb? May be because they are atheists?
 
ThinkTank@Cafe said:
It is just your opinion, man. You see it very rational I see it as extremely judgemental and derogatory.
I can’t prove that God exists and you can’t prove the opposite. So, it’s matter of choice. Why atheists are so aggressive and think all other people are dumb? May be because they are atheists?
Click to expand...
But isn't the burden of proof on those who claim God exists?
 
ThierryFabregas said:
Do you have any daleel for any of your claims?

Either way, Muhammed is meant to be the seal of the prophets and perfect man and ideal model for Muslims. How can you claim that and be at peace with him extorting and murdering a man for his possessions? And then not have an issue with him subjegating a grieving widow, after he killed her husband, to essentially be his sex slave with no choice to be a free woman who isn't raped by Muhammed. There isn't this choice of being free unless she subjegates herself to be Muhammed's wife, where he essentially owns her as a sex slave. Imagine how she must feel having to be intimate with a man who killed her husband. It's revolting and disgusting.

If I told you your brother was tortored for his wealth and murdered and then he had his wife taken from him by his murderer, how would you feel about this murderer? Would you consider him the ideal human?
Click to expand...

Not just daleel but also see the works of likes of Montgomery watt et al

As I said the issue of that particular war, the battle of the trench is quite specific. The punishment was not Muhammad's. There was a treaty. Kenana went through what he went through as agreed. Including the treasure issue. He had hidden what was to be given. He refused to accept he hid it and agreed to a punishment if he was found to be lying. He was lying when half was found where a witness had s en him bury it. He continued to lie about the rest.

Maslamah killing him in the end was because kenana had killed his brother.

This was under Jewish eye for an eye law. As judged by a man from his own tribe in Saad.
 
Last edited:
VorZakone said:
But isn't the burden of proof on those who claim God exists?
Click to expand...

Not really

As the Qur'an says you believe what you believe I believe what I believe, you won't believe what I believe and I won't believe what you believe, to you your way to me mine
 
Roane said:
That's an interesting take but not really accurate from what I've read in the Qur'an.

For one the days you speak of isn't days as in Monday to Friday. It isn't in the Bible either incidentally.

The explanation is more eras than days. So 1 day could be a thousand/million years as we know them.


Secondly the verses in the Qur'an are twofold. One verse describes the earth as spread out or flat for those walking it and the every n xr describes it as egg shaped or spherical. Even early scholars argued against the Roman held.view of a flat earth. The word yukawirru is linguistically related to the word ball. Likes of ibn hazim always argued this.

The mountains issue is not about a flat earth rather the role of the mountains and stability and them being long below the surface not just want you see above. The rest then is often describing the day of judgement specifically not what mountains are or do generally. Context needs to be applied here.

You quoted Surah 67:5. Which is Surah Mulk. That particular verse was in response to the claims of the soothsayers of the time and it's more about meteorites than stars.

Surah 41:12 is Surah fussilat and tbh it would take too long to respond to that point as it needs to be understood in context of at least 8 other Surah verses.
Click to expand...

You have lot of patience, bro. Mashalla
 
Well, mathematically there are at least 11 dimensions of space and time and humans can only comprehend 4 (including our linear time dimension).

Ants can only probably comprehend 2, possibly 3, but surely not time. So, compared to an ant we are higher beings (as in we can see the universe in more dimensions).

It would be arrogant to think there aren't beings that can comprehend more than 4 dimensions if there are at least 11, I mean, mathematically we can hypothesise hypercubes, on 4 dimensions of space, but we can't see them.

If there are a finite number of dimensions (11 or greater), then by definition any being that comprehends all those dimensions of time and space would be omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient. That doesn't mean it gives any more of a shit about you than you do to a single ant.

However, if there is an infinite number of dimensions then the higher up you look the higher the beings are, infinitely.
 
One of the funniest things I've ever heard was when I was having a nice chat about religion with a guy from uni and he said from out of nowhere "I love Muhammed more than I love my Mum".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.