Messages

61

Discussions / Ramadan Kareem 2019

« on: May 06, 2019, 01:36:05 PM »

Asalamu 3alykum

May God guide us to a better path and strengthan our faith and increase us in knoweldge and make us righteous servants of His.

I pray for all the brothers and sisters on this forum to have a blessed and productive Ramadan Insha'Allah.

May God bless you all and your families.

 

Peace

62

Posts on Facebook / Re: Sexual Relations with Minors - A Heinous Suggestion

« on: April 27, 2019, 04:49:33 PM »

Asalamu 3alykum brother Joseph

Thank you for sharing such an important topic and the article you have written.

It is disturbing to see this.
It is really important that believers understand such issues and know how to defend the truth.

Regarding the traditionalists claim

He claims: "If you just read the Quran, it would be halal to have sexual intercourse with a 5 year old" [53 seconds].

Wow I dont understand if the brother realises what he is actually claiming. He is admitting that God has allowed such an outrageous act and that he disbelieves in what the Quran is claiming to make halal and it is corrected by the hadith.

How does one even believe in the Qurans authenticity when it can be overruled by another source because of its injustice? Why even read the Quran? Really no point for those who understand things like this.

Thanks again

Asalamu 3alykum

63

General Discussions / Re: How would we know what the Safwa and alMarwah are?

« on: April 23, 2019, 07:09:00 PM »

Asalamu 3alykum

Dear brother Duster

Thank you for your kind words on another thread. I also have a lot of respect for you as well and I do have much interest in your views and Insha'Allah I look forward to reading your comments which I find have much wisdom Masha'Allah. May God bless you.

Regarding your comment though

you've probably noticed I'm pretty straight talking  and not as polished in my delivery as you are or other members on here

You think, because I never noticed 

Ive seen lots of your comments are with utmost respect and Insha'Allah you and the others i'm sure could overlook the arguments that went a bit side ways. I probably fall in doing the same thing sometimes. But I'm sure we are all here for each other with reminders when things get a little off.


Dear brother Student

You don't seem to disagree with Sir Joseph on any subject or even minor issues (at least I'm not aware of it). It would be interesting to know if you do, just curious 

You know brother actually I don't think I ever thought of that before. But to think of it now, I do not think I have come to an article or a writing of his that I would be able to disagree with regarding the message of the Quran. I have honesty found that he has provided clear evidences for his opinions and has remained intellectually honest Alhamdulila. He has shared clear proof from the Quran to his opinions and I have not yet found a reason to disagree with him. There was actually times where I understood a topic differently but after reading some of his input I have found them to be more convincing. Of course he is like any of us who may make a mistake, but Masha'Allah I find his opinions regarding Islamic affairs and studies are derived from the Quran and seem to be well balanced.

I have never found him being biased to any group or sect when interpolating or interpreting the Quran. Masha'Allah. He simply lets the Quran speak and unleashes the speeches of the Quran towards any criticism he finds from all sides of the spectrum be it traditionalist, Quranists, political, historical, finance, family affairs, business, law, etc.

I try to investigate brother Joseph's articles in many ways. One is with the approach that I only know Islam through the Quran. That as I read his articles, I divorce myself from any secondary information and see if they are verified/supported and not pose any violation to any other verse.

I also try to investigate them from the lenses of those who are traditionalists. As you may realize that some of the articles point out to mainly the traditionalist as they are the concern at times and the ones familiar with the topics, as the Quran is alien to some topics.

What you realize though is that brother Joseph seems to even have a great understanding(Masha'Allah) of what the arguments of the traditionalists are or going to be as if he is putting himself in their position for a moment and does not shy away from them, but does indeed challenge them using the Quran. So he not only shows the correct interpretation but also portrays how a misconception has no place in the Quran as it would cause problems in the verses of the Quran which a Muslim should not accept. This as a muslim needs to be appreciated.

Also I try to investigate his articles/opinions and compare them with the Quranists and other opinions. As we noticed there has been more than a few critics to his views, muslims and non-muslims and he seems to justify his stance solely with the Quran while remaining academically honest to the language. Which I appreciate.

I find Brother Joseph suggests that there is a relative starting point from where the Quran needs to be understood from. I agree with this and take it into account. Any truth seeker would agree that words have meaning and a message from God cannot be manifested with lost words that are only determined by what peoples worldly views are. That would be tantamount to a book from the people and what they want instead a book from God

Any rational human should agree that a clear message from God would need an established language to be used as a medium to interpret it. Otherwise the book can be misinterpreted and no one should be held responsible for their faults and the way of God would be mocked at.

Alhamdulila and Masha'Allah I cannot say I have found disagreement with how he views the Quran and its interpretation.


Those are some of the reason where I find that I have not disagreed with him on any subject. I find his works to be consistent and has not said something to contradict himself in expressing his views of the Quran.

I also understand that seekers of truth or students of the Quran do not shy to change their opinions when better arguments have been professed or learned. That being said he has been writing for quite some time now I noticed, and I understand and appreciate that maybe some of his older opinions could be updated or changed.

Salam brother Student

64

Prophets and Messengers / Re: Who can prove I'm not Imam al-Mahdi?

« on: April 23, 2019, 02:32:47 PM »

Asalamu 3alykum

Welcome to the forum

I briefly went over your site and realized you have adopted the fallacy of the traditionalists storey/narrative of the Mahdi.

This narrative has no support from the Book of God when it is understood correctly especially when it comes to understanding the term "prophet" and "messenger".

It seems that you have believed that there will only be one messenger/rasul after the prophet Muhammad(pbuh).

This is not warranted from the Quran, as a matter of fact the Quran supports that messengers will continue to come as God wills, to warn or confirm the truth which we possess.

There could of been many that have walked the earth from the time of prophet Muhammad till present day that have warned and confirmed the truth to their respective nations. As you seem to understand that to every nation there is a messenger and to every nation a messenger will speak to his people in their language. This does not mean that one final messenger will come and his name is the Mahdi(Matheism) to the whole world.

This has nothing to do with a final messenger named Mahdi which is alien to the Quran.

Also keep in mind that a belief in such a final saviour to come as a prophecy is unwarranted as this will contradict the message of the Quran as it teaches that believers should believe in the imminent hour to come suddenly without warning.

Hopes that helps Insha'Allah

Salam

END OF PROPHETHOOD - CONTINUATION OF MESSENGERS?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/end%20of%20prophethood%20FM3.htm

THE UNWARRANTED INFATUATION WITH SEEKING KNOWLEDGE OF THE FINAL HOUR
https://www.facebook.com/joseph.a.islam/posts/494897590647373

65

Women / Re: Women's clothes and rape?

« on: April 13, 2019, 09:43:32 PM »

Asalamu 3alykum

Dear brother Duster and sister ShatteredEmblem

Just a reminder that we are brothers and sisters and yes it could be frustrating to see eye to eye at times. 

I admire that we are on this forum because we believe in the authenticity of the Quran for one reason or another although some topics might not be comfortable or maybe beyond our comprehension for a while.

I would like to start off by trying to answer a couple questions you had while not giving to many assumptions.

I feel like some people use the command for women to cover so they are not "molested" (33:59) to show that clothing is supposed to protect a woman? But I've even heard of cases where women were sexually assaulted near the Kabah, fully clothed. How is clothing a protection?

33:59 O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.

It is worth to mention that this verse has been revealed to the prophet to tell only his wives, daughters and the believing women to draw over themselves their clothing so that they are not abused, or troubled.

This verse is surrounded by verses where there is abuse/insults being spread or said about God, the prophet, believing men and believing women. There is no instruction to fight against such insults as the only punishment is one that is deferred to another life(33:57-58).

However there is a threat from God that if and only if the hypocrites do not stop inciting hatred and false rumours against the believers which could cause corruption and disturbance in a land and the killing of innocent people then God will grant victory to the believers by way of fighting(33:60-61)

So that being said there is nothing to suggest to me that the word "yu'dhayna" in verse 33:59 means molesting. As this would directly be an act of severe transgression, rape, or violence and would arguably result in immediate retaliation and one that is just as bad or even worse than what is happening in 33:60-61.

The verse above does give guidance to those who are God conscious and who seek to be chaste married or unmarried on how to dress and not be troubled or insulted by the disbelievers or anyone.

Why is it so common in the Muslim community to acknowledge men's sexual "urges" and "inclination to commit adultery/sin" but not as much women's?

Well true muslims should not give off that impression and I'm sure they understand women and men have desires and it is well known from the Quran that a man and women can fall into sin not juts a man. (24:2). Another example is in the story of prophet Joseph and the wife of the king.

Regardless of where this was rooted from, a person man or women who desires to be a believer and seek to abide by the laws of God will know that God strongly condemns adultery/sin (24:2).

Those who are Muslim men and think because of their urges they are able to commit adultery/sin are only fooling themselves.

However we also have to admit that adultery/fornication is not the same as a marriage bond. This needs to be appreciated. If a women has urges then they must commit to a marriage bond which has rules. Like wise for a man.

The women has the right to marry who she wants and the man has the right to marry who he wants as long as they are believers.

Where from a Quranic perspective in a marriage its the man who is responsible for giving a dowry to whatever a women wants, that he is a protector and provider for the family, etc.

There are also women who have higher urges than their male counterparts in marriages/relationships.

I'll take your word for it

What's the "solution" for a woman if she's married to a man but desires more than him? And it does happen! Women also cheat and commit adultery!

Yes sister I'm sure they are prone to doing these things just as men do.

The Quran in my humble opinion is not giving a man a solution or remedy for his temptations by allowing him to marry more than one wife. Although this can be taken advantage of.

There is times where a man or a women cannot find marriage and God instructs them to be patient 24:33 no matter how great the appetite for sexual relations are.

Therefore the permissibility for polygyny is not so much only to satisfy ones needs. There is wider wisdom possibly only known to the Lord Himself.

I would say self-constraint and being patient is the way for both men and women, so I don't understand why men can have an excuse and even a "solution"....

[/quote]

I'm a little confused as to what you are asking now?

You seem to have given yourself the answer or at least you seemed to acknowledge that self-constraint is possible no matter the urges. I agree with you.

So if you believe this is a solution and it can be done, then I see the problem you may have at this point is that you find that if the man is allowed to marry more than one so should the women. But if the man does not do it then the women should not do it.

I feel like the problem you have is with the issue of equality and what God has imposed on men and women. Not so much that one cannot self-constraint or abide by the rules of God, but by that of equality.

To be honest sister I do not think anyone Except God can tell us why He has chosen these laws. The Quran also has laws about other things that we do not understand which do not impose a threat on the message of the Quran but does give the believers something to think about and put their trust in God.

We men are also possibly puzzled because we know that it hurts some of our wives and daughters and mothers. We see their curiosity as to why. But what do we do? Ban it, forbid it?

I'm sure some do not do it because they understand it hurts their families in days like today. But is it right to twist the words of God and try to some how ban it?

As I’m sure you will appreciate that we are believers of the Quran and accepted the Quran's veracity and believe the origin of the Quran to be from the Lord. Just because we are not able to fathom or comprehend the reason behind why God has allowed polygany for a man, we cannot simply forbid it or sweeten the message to the liking of others which I've noticed muslim men have tried to do at certain points.


We do not encompass the life of this world and what it entails.

Todays world is changing fast. As always it changes in different directions all the time. From good to bad, from bad to good, or whatever roots the people choose.

It could be argued that this life is not always so pleasant and calm and will never be a heavenly abode, and the events that have unfolded in the past or will unfold in the future will possibly carry the answers to such questions and why God has chosen these rights to whatever of His creation. He encompasses all things. There does seem from a historic standpoint that women were not always against polygany so much as to how women are today. Was there something that caused or led it to be acceptable to some point? or was it a need in the world? Will it happen again?

Just some thoughts I ask myself.

God knows best.

As believing men we need to understand these questions also. Its our duty to try to share as best as possible the message of God to our sisters, wives, mothers, etc. and vice versa.

We need to understand that women are going to be somewhat saddened and not comprehend as to why God has allowed it and we men will also possibly not understand its comprehension as well.

Insha'Allah other ladies would comment and give their views as well, and please do not think we are against you but take it as we also have thought about it and just sharing to what we understand best.

God knows best

Peace

66

General Discussions / Re: Plastic Surgery

« on: April 08, 2019, 04:03:47 PM »

Asalamu 3alykum

Dear brother Mohamed

I would like to go over some point you have made and illustrate how I humbly feel that they are not in harmony with the Quranic message.

you mentioned

“but why accidents?

[42:30] "And what struck/hit you from a misfortune /disaster so (it is) because (of) what your hands gathered/acquired, and He forgives/pardons on much."

Did you ever think of such cases in prophet's time? e.g. accidents/ injuries in the war?”

There is confirmation in the Quran that believers had died in fighting for the sake of the Lord. There is also times where God has permitted believers to lay down their arms if they were sick.  There have been a war that believers also have lost.

So one would strongly assume there was many accidents and injuries in the prophets time.

And its true indeed what the verse you kindly shared informs us 42:30.

This should be looked at by the causes and effects of the nature of the world and the nature of the laws God has created.

The misfortune/disasters are indeed by what we have done by our own hands. We humans have a some understanding about the laws and nature of the world.

We can comprehend the dangers of riding a vehicle 200km/hr.

We understand and can assume what may happen if we are not clean, or we eat to much, or if we take intoxicants, or pollute the Earth, etc.

At times any tragedy could result from many of our own doings for sure.
It could even be illnesses, epidemics , disasters involving earthquakes, floods and so on. This COULD be also from the actions of the humans which is ultimately at the end that everything is from God who created everything.

However, if any good or better change comes after, we believers understand that it comes from God in any way or form. Whether from miracles of God or from causes and effects of the nature which God Himself arranged measured and ordained and knew before He even created the universe or whether it is from the causes and effects of technology and wisdom given to His creation. This would all fall in the category by God’s will.

God’s unfathomable wisdom is so perfect and infinite and by His will He could orchestrate and plan a universe before its even created from nothing with specific laws to carry out a zillion+ years of precise causes and effects that would result in every second what He wills of beings, planets, matter etc exactly when and to who, that would in turn be part of His will to create whether through evolution or not, to trial/test, balance, sustain, provide, check people for one another or give or take away from His creation to who ever as He pleases, to cause death or losses or gains etc . Thats just an example but I hope you see that what I’m saying. So even technology or from what has been provided on Earth or from our own handy work through causes and effects if we benefit at all in the right conduct it is ultimately from the Creator.


You asked “GOD can replace it if the person deserves it without the need of any surgery!”

A human body part that has been distorted and then to be replaced without the intervention of natural and worldly laws, surgery etc would be seen as a miracle and outside the realm of this world.

I would say that would be akin to what God willed and has given Jesus(pbuh) the ability to do to heal the blind, the leper and raise the dead.

Certainly God can replace it. But the Question is does God always intervene in the creation and laws He has made?

You will certainly find at times that He did. Those are from the miracles that He has given to the prophets afortime ago.

God indeed can do anything at any time as He wills. But there seems to be at the normal stage that God lets the natural laws of the world unravel and let the causes and effects take there place in the universe and human and the free will He has given him to do as he pleases within the confined laws so that God will judge the human for the actions that has taken place.

God makes it clear that He refrains from sending miracles because of the people before had denied them and they made no change.

17:59 "And We refrain from sending signs / miracles (Arabic: bil-ayati), only because the former generations treated them as false: We sent the she-camel to the Thamud to open their eyes, but they treated her wrongfully: We only send the signs by way of a warning"
 

you said

”If X harm Y intentionally/unintentionally, it happens because GOD -THE JUST, THE MERCIFUL letting X to do so, and Y deserves it.
But if Y do not deserves it/is innocent, then GOD -THE JUST, THE MERCIFUL will NEVER let X to do it.”

I would say I have to kindly disagree with you brother.

God’s judgments and punishments are not always carried out in this earthly abode.

We know from the Quran that some punishments are deferred to a future life.

We understand from the Quran that a certain group of people had killed the prophets and humankind who enjoin in equity unjustly. 3:21

This shows that God had let mankind carry out even transgressions on this earth and His punishment is to be promised to another life.

You said

“Do you think GOD is JUST only in the hereafter? Not in this world?”

Justice is not always dealt with in this world. This does not equate to God being unjust. In fact it shows that God has allowed the human to maneuver in this world with the will he/she is given with the restraints and confinements of the laws. So that he/she can be punished or rewarded for the actions in the next world.

Regarding the verse 2:251, God is making it clear that "He is the One and not by chance or the people's will" who replaces authority from certain people to another people on earth or else if it was left in the hands of a great mighty people who are transgressors/unjust/corruptors then the Earth would of long been destroyed or corrupt and there is no way to bring it back or to give another chance at the trials and the commands of God to another people. This is also in the same verse as when David slew Goliath which was apparent to believers that its by "God’s leave" that a small group can only defeat a large group.

And to confirm this as we note in the Quran God has given power and authority to the prophet Muhammad and his people and strengthened them with Angels that they did not see against the polytheists even though they were much more greater in number than them.

God asked the believer not to say that they were the ones who slayed them but it was God who did.

8:17 Ye (Muslims) slew them not, but Allah slew them. And thou (Muhammad) threwest not when thou didst throw, but Allah threw, that He might test the believers by a fair test from Him. Lo! Allah is Hearer, Knower.

Thought I would share that for know to think about

Peace

67

General Discussions / Re: "Muhammad was not from Mecca" by Sam Garrans

« on: March 10, 2019, 06:50:53 AM »

Peace

It is true that the Quran does not directly with one verse indicate that Masjid Al Haram is located in Mecca but does give the most possible support that is it in Mecca through the whole message of the Quran and definitely does not give any evidence directly or indirectly otherwise.

Belivers will not always know everything perfectly and with certainty but are directed to take the best possible meanings and interpretations as I already know you know.

39:18 Those who listen to the Word, and follow the best (meaning) in it: those are the ones whom Allah has guided, and those are the ones endued with understanding.

Hope you find this article helpful.

Peace

IS MAKKAH THE ORIGINAL LOCATION FOR THE MASJID AL-HARAM?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/original sanctuary FM3.htm

68

General Discussions / Re: How would we know what the Safwa and alMarwah are?

« on: March 09, 2019, 05:17:12 AM »

Peace Wakas

It's obvious frim the Quran that God has guided humanity through the Quran and had choosen to use a nation of the Arabs and their culture and system to be an example. From there much can be extracted.

Verse 5:3 states that God has perfected the religion/ways/system of Muhammad's people.

They used to have a religion but it was adjusted so that it would fit the system of God. (Islam). The Quran also had reconfirmed the previous scriptures and provided itself as guard over them and also provided itself as a guidance to humanity.

There was certain foods thst the Arabs mad lawful to certain things and forbid some other food. Was not acceptable and they were guided in what to eat and what not to eat.
They had a prayer but not acceptable. Their  prayers was whisling and clapping. God had then corrected and established a correct way.

They had a direction of prayer but that was allowed to continue.

Like bro Duster was mentioning the people seemed to be doing practices that God had allowed to continue. Those did not seem to intervene in the system of the Lord.

Peace

69

General Discussions / Re: How would we know what the Safwa and alMarwah are?

« on: March 08, 2019, 07:22:57 AM »

Asalamu 3alykum

In light of verse 5:3 brother Dusters comment seems valid and not sure why you find it flimsy as I notice you seem to find many valid opinions flimsy while you fail to make a conclusive valid opinion. Sometimes a close opinion or a close practice to a command is better than no action or implementation. For example zakat zakat hajj etc

Forbidden unto you (for food) are carrion and blood and swineflesh, and that which hath been dedicated unto any other than Allah, and the strangled, and the dead through beating, and the dead through falling from a height, and that which hath been killed by (the goring of) horns, and the devoured of wild beasts, saving that which ye make lawful (by the death-stroke), and that which hath been immolated unto idols. And (forbidden is it) that ye swear by the divining arrows. This is an abomination. This day are those who disbelieve in despair of (ever harming) your religion; so fear them not, fear Me! This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you, and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam. Whoso is forced by hunger, not by will, to sin: (for him) lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Salam

70

Islamic Duties / Re: ZAKAT

« on: December 23, 2018, 01:07:44 PM »

Peace brother Wakas

What I meant to say by enforced is that the state has the right to the dues owned to them. How they take it is another topic.

As you know that it's very difficult and not always possible to know what is due by the citizens and that it's left up to the citizens freedom and integrity to make the calculations.

As time progresses like anything there will be better ways to establish things better.

God did not impose a punishment for those who do not pay it because it would not be something that anyone would be able to audit especially in those times.

However there does seem warrant for the state to take whats there's as this rule is given from the overall message of the Qurans perspectives Justice.

Also I would relate this question as what is the punishment for a person who does not pay a speeding traffic ticket?

If its been made clear that a person had violated a rule in the state then one would expect a fair penalty to get what is owed.

The state would have the right to take whats theirs if one is found to not be paying theirs dues however there has always been times when the state has no means to look for those who do not pay and also times where there is no proof and is only based on trust.

But that does not prevent a state to improve their system to get what belongs to them and impose any penalty in order to get what is rightfully theirs.

Peace

71

Islamic Duties / Re: ZAKAT

« on: December 23, 2018, 04:15:15 AM »

Asalamu 3alaykum

Dear Narok

Thank you for sharing your opinion on the topic of Zakat and welcome to the forum. 

Although the explanation of the command of giving Zakat might not be as clear as for example do not eat swine flesh or do not consume intoxicants, one still needs to accept the best interpretation of what is surrounding us.

I would respectfully disagree with your opinion on the basis that you have mingled/joined the interpretations of "Sadaqa", "zakat" and the term "anfiqu".

Regarding your comment

Any sane person who strives for spiritual purification is asked by the question: “How much should you spend on the way to the contentment of God?” It’s no secret that since the times of antiquity, the rates of payment have been determined in the Muslim law. However, as can be seen from the text of the Quran, they cannot be considered as final installations. A person has the right to decide for himself how much he needs to spend on the way of God. The only guideline for this is the following excerpt:

In regards to zakat as to how much to spend I would disagree with your comment as the Quran does command even the non-believers to give/pay the dues/zakat which implies not just a voluntarily amount and not only a religious obligation. If believers and non-believers are ordered to pay a due, there must be a determined amount from those in authority.

41:6" ...and woe to the polytheists 41:7 Who give not the 'Zakat' and who are disbelievers in the Hereafter "
 
Also when believers where visiting the prophet Muhammad(pbuh) they were also asked to give voluntarily in charity/Sadaqa but if they were unable, then keep paying the zakat which again implies an amount that is set by authority.

58:12-13 O ye who believe! When ye hold conference with the messenger, offer an alms(Sadaqatan) before your conference. That is better and purer for you. But if ye cannot find (the wherewithal) then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Fear ye to offer alms(sadaqtan) before your conference? Then, when ye do it not and Allah hath forgiven you, establish worship and pay the poor-due and obey Allah and His messenger. And Allah is Aware of what ye do.

We note many important information from the 2 verses above:

First that Zakat and Sadaqa are not the same

Second that Sadaqat may not always be available and voluntary from the phrase " But if ye cannot find (the wherewithal) then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." and the phrase "Fear ye to offer alms before your conference? Then, when ye do it not..."

Third that Sadaqat maybe forgiven given ones circumstances and God knows best who is able and not able. "and Allah hath forgiven you"

Forth is that Zakat is still commanded even in the case when Sadaqah is unable to be given. Which implies that the rule for zakat is compulsory in a state.

In considering the above, Sadaqa is still compulsory on believers who have the means but its on a personal level. The rewards, or punishments from giving it or not giving it will be from God. But it is not to be enforced on people from a government perspective like Zakat.

Also regarding the timing of paying zakat the Quran indicates to pay the dues on harvest day(which points to a system that dues should be deducted from profit gains)

6:141 He it is Who produceth gardens trellised and untrellised, and the date-palm, and crops of divers flavour, and the olive and the pomegranate, like and unlike. Eat ye of the fruit thereof when it fruiteth, and pay the due thereof upon the harvest day, and be not prodigal. Lo! Allah loveth not the prodigals.



For more information on this subject brother I would read the two detailed articles below.

Insha'Allah that helps

Also regarding Beyond Tradition's comments, if one finds that in their society there is no rules for such concepts then one can only do what is voluntary and give in God's sake as much as possible.

The intention remains the same.

Peace

Sadaqah & Zakat
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=2475.0

WHAT IS THE CONCEPT OF ZAKAT FROM THE QURAN?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/zakah%20FM3.htm

72

Discussions / Re: Techniques Deployed Against the Quran-Centric Position by the Tradionalist

« on: November 09, 2018, 03:29:24 PM »

Asalamu 3alykum

Thank you very much brother Joseph, Masha'Allah this is very valuable information you have provided. Jazak Allah Kahir Insha'Allah.

I hope you don’t mind me adding my thoughts to this post.

A lot of times what I notice ends up happening in debates between traditionalists and those who only uphold the Quran is that the debate never grows academically because the first step you mentioned is never affirmed and established at the start.

Both sides have to firmly make an agreement or come to common terms that the Quran will be the only source to prove or disprove that any secondary sources are warranted as religious authoritative guidance.

If this is not established the debate or discussion would be fruitless to continue and would be best to leave it as that and one can therefor conclude that both parties do not share the same platform to which they make up their religion.


If however that agreement is established, a Quran centric position must have the ability to provide evidence from the Quran that other sources are cautioned and prohibited as religious authority [1]. This must be known and understood with confidence. There is explicit verses whether read in context or out of context that provide this evidence.

Expect that the traditionalist is going to share verses from the Quran to prove that secondary sources are authorized.

Once provided three things need to happen at this stage:


1. Caution that if the verses shared by the traditionalist are to be understood in the manner that “secondary sources are justified by the Quran”, that we are admitting that contradictions in the Quran are present because opposing verses which clearly prohibit the use of any other sources used for religious authority are also in the Quran.  Share those verses if they have not been shared yet[1].


2. Demand an explanation as to why the Quran contradicts itself by stating on one hand that secondary sources are authorized and on the other hand the Quran prohibits secondary sources. How can one logically and academically bridge the two concepts together. This cannot be dismissed. True enquiries will need to find answers and are responsible for searching. A true believer of the Quran needs to find a solution to this and not dismiss this topic. Because if a book claimed to be from the Lord is weak in its manifestation, clarity, and consistency it would be deemed not credible.

That must at this point be establish as well, that the Quran being from the Lord cannot have such contradictions.

3. A Quran centric position must also have the ability to defend and explain many of the verses of the Quran that are being misinterpreted by the traditionalist correctly (Insha’Allah I will post another thread explaining the verses that are taken out of context and mis-translated). If this cannot be done the discussion will also not go far as this might seem to be an equal stance to some, and an outside enquirer might also find the Quran not so creditable due to apparently conflicting messages.

I find no matter how hard the traditionalist tries, he/she is unable to bridge the verses together to make a logical explanation and leaves their position very weak.

At this point the argument is clearly on the side of the Quran centric position.

If the argument progresses, expect now to be asked about why the Quran lacks details of certain commands.

What needs to be made clear from this point is that, the Quran does not lack any details at all. It only lacks details from the relative point of whats been added or invented in the name of religion over the past 1400+ years or in others words from the lenses of a present day Islam which one needs to admit that over the span of time could of intentionally or unintentionally obscured its message with false prohibitions and legislations if not resorting to reassessing the source.

So again if anyone was to ask a question about why the Quran lacks details in certain commands or asks to point out in the Quran where it explains “how we should pray”, respond by saying that question is akin to asking the Quran to accept our ways instead of the other way around.

These questions are based on the assumption that humans are prohibited from using wisdom and intellect to perform certain duties and commands.

A believer should accept the Quran’s details as being enough to devise a plan to establish whatever is commanded.

If the prophet and the first believers were expected to put commands into practice and if for some reason or another they have been obscured or lost in time, then the following believers or new seekers would also be expected to do the same as the first especially with a protected Scripture from the Lord.

The prophet and the first believers had simple commands and they were expected to put them into practice. We would not doubt that they were mindful and took wisdom from the story in Surah Bakarah and would not of repeated the actions of the people of Moses when they were asked about performing a simple command. [2]


So if one inherits a concept/method/process/form of a command that does NOT befit the Quran’s teachings then one is advised to produce one. As it must of been accidentally or purposely lost in time which is not uncommon (19:59).


If an inherited concept/method/process/form is found satisfactory by the Quran I suggest to follow as there is no need to keep re-inventing a practice that is acceptable by the Quran especially when it is on-going, spread and performed by the masses which after all could possibly be faithfully and with good intent passed down by generation to generation leading to the first believing recipients or the prophet (pbut) which were the first to be instructed to establish the principles of the Quran. Secondly also because the Quran does advocate ties between believers(21:92) and also generally tells to congregate/gather together and consult between each other (94:102), (2:43), (42:38) . See related article below[3]


I would also make a note that instead of asking such questions and implicitly suggesting the Quran is lacking details despite its proclamation that its “explained in detail and a clear explanation of all things”, one should seek why the Quran left such aspects silent and might find that there maybe be signs in the Qurans intentional and deliberate succinct details.

[1] GOD HAS WARNED BELIEVERS TO ONLY FOLLOW THE QURAN
http://quransmessage.com/articles/god%20has%20warned%20believers%20to%20only%20follow%20the%20quran%20FM3.htm

THE QURAN STANDS ALONE AS SOLE RELIGIOUS GUIDANCE
http://quransmessage.com/articles/quran%20sole%20guidance%20FM3.htm


[2] A Simple Instruction Confounds Many - 'Establish Salaat'
https://www.facebook.com/joseph.a.islam/posts/487157614754704

[3]IS THE QURAN SIMPLY A REVELATION TO BE UNDERSTOOD AND APPLIED ON A PERSONAL LEVEL?
https://www.facebook.com/joseph.a.islam/posts/538289746308157

73

General Discussions / Re: People of the book.

« on: September 25, 2018, 01:31:47 PM »

Peace

Im not saying Christians are muskrikeen.

In the main and by default people who follow Jesus(pbuh) are believers(muslims)  even if they don't call themselves the name muslims.  Its the meaning that counts.   

5:111 And when I inspired the disciples, (saying): Believe in Me and in My messenger, they said: We believe. Bear witness that we have surrendered (unto Thee) "we are muslims(muslimoon)".

Note that the disciples of Jesus (pbuh) were Muslims

As we all agree Jesus never said he was a God or a son of God.

So the Christians who follow Jesus and do not take him as a Lord have not ascribed partners to God. Those God speaks of in the Quran and those are the ones who are lawful to marry from a Qurans perspective.

Those who call themselves Christians and have taken Jesus as their Lord have ashraku(ascribed partners with God) hence why I used the term mushrikeen.

5:72-74They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said: O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners(yushrik) unto Allah, for him Allah hath forbidden paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evil-doers there will be no helpers.

They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three; when there is no Allah save the One Allah. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve.

Will they not rather turn unto Allah and seek forgiveness of Him? For Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

What would you call a muslim today who ascribes partners with God?

The word mushrikeen does often refer to the idolators polytheists who never recieved a Scripture from God in the Quran. Thats likely because that is how they percieved themselves.

Also God does not use the word mushrikeen to call to the Christian because the Christians did not perceive themselves as that. But in other clear words God does say explicitly that those who ascribe partners to Him have ashraku. It doesn't matter what one labels themselves Muslims, Christians or Jewish.

Also a note is that mushrikeen are not necessarily disbelievers.
Thats another discussion.

Peace

UNDERSTANDING 'KUFR' (DISBELIEF) FROM A QURANIC PERSPECTIVE
http://www.quransmessage.com/articles/understanding kufr FM3.htm

74

General Discussions / Re: People of the book.

« on: September 24, 2018, 02:30:31 AM »

Salam

Also regarding your comment

another point is that Allah has put both the christians and jews in one group ie people of the book even thu the jews do not belive in the trinity.. so being "of the book " is  stauts given to those with  the  devine book regardless of the trinity issue. 

I would like to mention that yes its true that even Christians who hold to the concept of the trinity are also refered to in the Quran as "People of the Book"  as they are infact a people who were given a Scripture from God.

This does not mean that they are from the lawful spouses a believer who takes his/her guidance from the Quran can choose from. They would also be classified as people of the book yes but those who has choosen to ascribe partners with God. There is a simple command that do not marry idolators(polytheists)  2:221.

So one needs to understand verse 5:5 in light of 2:221 and 3:113

Salam

75

General Discussions / Re: People of the book.

« on: September 23, 2018, 04:10:23 PM »

Asalamu 3alykum

I think its important to read the Quran from the view of those who are the first recipients of it.

The first recipients are prophet Muhammad(pbuh) and his people. Its clear from many verses that the prophet and his people are uneducated about the Abrahamic faith. They are termed to be "ummiyoun". They are called to faith and there are some who believed(Aamanu) and there are some who rejected(kafaru). God repeatedly calls them and separates them from different people in their surroundings. This does not mean they are the only believers(muslims).

Its also clear that in the prophets vicinity there are others who are from the Abrahamic faith who speak Arabic. They are termed to be People of the Book, Bani Israel, Yahuud, Nasara, etc.

The term "Muslim" as a label for a nation as a whole does not to seem to be established in that time like in todays world.

Anyone of those who received guidance from God and follows it is a Muslim from a Quran's perspective. The Christians, and the Jews would of had a equivalent word that means Muslim in their own language.

Verse 5:5 is making it clear to a new community that those chaste women who also come to belief and those who are chaste from the people of the book are lawful in marriage to them.

The reason God has put the believing women in a separate category is to make it clear that those who are also muslims from the people of the book are also lawful in marriage.  Its also to make it clear that not only the people who believe in the Quran are Muslims but also those who are from the people of the book. In this verse the context is clear, that the people of the book who are being mentioned are the ones following the truth and not the ones who have taken a wrong path as for example worshipping other Gods or ascribing partners to God. One can tell what path is wrong or right by collaborating their ways with the message of the Quran. All the Scriptures must be consistent.

You said

also when Allah spoke in this verse he didn't  specify which group of christians  are eligible for  marriage..He spoke in general ie people of the book ..He did not say "believing people of the book" 

There is no reason to say "believing people of the book" as the context is key and tells which ones God is speaking of. Its also clear from the Quran that:

3:113 Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (For the right): They rehearse the Signs of Allah all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration.

u said :  Not those who were given the Book but are seen as polytheists ....  why do u say they are polythiest? sura elbayena  aya 1 definitely excludes them from polythiesm  " Those who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists were not to be parted [from misbelief] until there came to them clear evidence "

What I meant by polytheists are those who worship more than one God. Like some Christians who take Jesus as a lord or a son of God I would say they are not monotheists but polytheists. Either way I should of explained it different.


The verse you mentioned is capturing a people who have rejected(kafaru) the Quran in the prophets time. The verse is clear that those who have rejected the Quran from those who received a Scripture from God(Jews,Christians) and those who are polytheists(mushrikeen)(from the ummiyoun,) are not going to be parted from their decision of rejecting the Quran until clear evidence comes to them.

Here God is telling us about people of the scripture regardless of whether they are ascribing partners to God or not they are at least rejecting the Quran and God is also telling us about another group of people who were presently mushrikeen(ascribing partners to God) who also rejected the Quran.

Again the reason the Quran separates the polytheists from the people of the book is because thats exactly how people perceived themselves and its because thats how they were.

You said

i think we can eat or marry form christians in general and the distinction between christians that u refer to is related to Allah's  relation to them not ours...because like i said when Allah allowed us to marry and eat their food He did not mention 'which" christians He spoke of them in general.

I would have to respectfully disagree with that statement.

The food that is spoken of in that verse is about the lawful food prescribed to them in truth and the marriage from the People of the Book is not from those who ascribe partners to God as it would go against the spirit of the Quran and this verse

2:221 Do not marry idolater women unless they believe in God. A believing slave girl is better than an idolater, even though the idolaters may attract you. Do not marry idolater men unless they believe in God. A believing slave is better than an idolater, even though the idolater may attract you. The pagans invite you to the fire, but God invites you to Paradise and forgiveness through His will. God shows His evidence to people so that they may take heed.


You said

another point is that Allah has put both the christians and jews in one group ie people of the book even thu the jews do not belive in the trinity.. so being "of the book " is  stauts given to those with  the  devine book regardless of the trinity issue.

I think its more to it than just the trinity issue. I would say in my personal humble opinion that its about faith. The message seems to be encouraging the recipients of the Quran to marry believing practicing women from the people of the book who also recognize the Quran as the true faith. This is more than hinted in verse 5:5 as it allows for the People of the Book to lift the restrictions of food that was once forbidden for them and with the acceptance of the Quran, verse 5:5 becomes in effect and they may now eat from all the food the Quran has made lawful.That being said they would by default accept the Quran testimony. They are not asked to convert but that they understand or accept the Quran is also the word of God.

I would also have to safely say the verse does not restrict men from marrying women from the people of the book who follow their guidance in truth(making sure they are not amongst those who ascribe partners with God) regardless if they believe in the Quran or not.


Salam