I revised this Q/A and will link to an older post on the same kind of discussion; enjoy :)
Abe Lincoln's legacy will be in the next post, insha allah.
Q./A.
Good day Jane, thanks for the reply again. I hope you are well.
<<<
although I am an atheist, I was a Christian for 25 years. This is what Christians believe as well. They believe that God created human beings with the ability to know and love him. If God did do this, then it is expected that he would reveal himself adequately to all human beings, particularly if heaven or hell is on the line. But I don't think that we can say that God has done this. There are billions of people today who believe other things than you do about God/Allah. There are billions of people who have lived previously who have believed in the spirits and polytheism. What humans believe about the gods is complex and not totally understood, but it can certainly be said that the most important determinant in this is culture; when and where a person was born.
I also have some experience with the Mormons. One day after they gave me their book, I decided to read. After finishing, I found nothing to make me believe that this was the prophetic word of God. When I told them this in a follow-up appointment, they asked me if I had prayed to God while reading to reveal to me if it was true. I came to understand that these people had had a religious experience where they were confident that this book was inspired by God. I have had my own religious experiences as a Christian that convinced me that Christianity was the true religion. These types of experiences are common to all human beings and I am sure that some pagans had the same experience regarding Zeus, Thor, and Shiva.
It’s also quite bizarre to think that everything that happens is according to God's will. There are 9 million children that die every year before the age of five, before they had ever had a chance to formulate any solid beliefs about a deity. And millions of human beings have died before birth as a result of spontaneous miscarriage. Hundreds of millions of other humans are born with congenital brain defects, so hardly can be expected to formulate correct beliefs about God.
to my mind, these facts are inconsistent with a God that wants to have a relationship with human beings, but quite consistent with religion being a human phenomenon. It is unreasonable to believe that human beings who follow other religions are deliberately being wicked. There certainly are some frauds out there, but the majority of regular people are earnest in their belief. They are not deliberately rejecting Allah and the Prophet; they have just come to believe other things.
it seems quite clear to me, that this world is not governed by any divine will, but by cold impersonal mindless physical forces. This beautifully explains all phenomena in the world from tsunamis, floods, drought, the plague, malaria, birth defects, a world governed by survival of the fittest and dominated by survival of the strongest, the diversity of life. And suffering. IMHO, a loving deity who wants a relationship with human individuals does not.
. <<
my point about the four witnesses is that we have better ways to determine whether adultery occurred. It is not a very practical requirement for adultery because it's almost never going to happen. It is more likely that a rich spouse hired 4 witnesses. In addition three reliable witnesses could be enough. Why not five witnesses?
Finally stoning to death is a horrific punishment for adultery. There are many people who have committed adultery who have reformed themselves to become valuable citizens in the world. My best friend was one of them. If he had been stoned to death his two children and wife would've missed out on a great provider, husband and father. He was suffering his psychological issues at the time when he was in his early 20s.
My point about rape was that Islam has difficulty deciding what rape is. There are many people claiming to know Islamic jurisprudence on this who feel that sometimes the woman is responsible, at least partly, if she is inadequately accompanied or dressed. Apparently Islam feels that men are barbarians and cannot resist women.
Reply – many non-Muslims also say things like this, it doesn’t mean it is okay for a man to commit rape, and most Muslims know that rape isn’t justified because the woman is not properly dressed; many rapists are non-Muslims, I’d say more than likely most are non-Muslims. India at the moment has a big problem with gang rape; the question is obvious – why is it happening? Are all men "barbarians" after all?It seems men there regard women as objects, and many men may well be affected by drugs, alcohol, pornography, and so on. If they are not able to marry or have sex with women, they resort to rape, because it is a gang activity, I doubt it is a group psychosis, but a group activity which has gained acceptance among youth or men there. Obviously, the society has many ills if this is the case.)
Reply – many non-Muslims also say things like this, it doesn’t mean it is okay for a man to commit rape, and most Muslims know that rape isn’t justified because the woman is not properly dressed; many rapists are non-Muslims, I’d say more than likely most are non-Muslims. India at the moment has a big problem with gang rape; the question is obvious – why is it happening? Are all men "barbarians" after all?It seems men there regard women as objects, and many men may well be affected by drugs, alcohol, pornography, and so on. If they are not able to marry or have sex with women, they resort to rape, because it is a gang activity, I doubt it is a group psychosis, but a group activity which has gained acceptance among youth or men there. Obviously, the society has many ills if this is the case.)
in my country, rape is not very common. The vast majority of women live their lives never experiencing it. I think it is far more prevalent in poor countries, like India and Pakistan. Not sure how much rape is reported in some countries and as I said before, we can always make rape very unlikely by chaining women to their homes, but that would[not] increase the quality of lives for women. The vast majority of Western women value their freedom and the ability to make their own decisions.
Reply – Stu, you said you are from America or the west? Where do you actually live and call home, then, because rape happens every five minutes or even more than that in America. I think you are not telling me the whole truth…? I believe it was also, Stu, but I could be mistaken who said his wife was at the Boston Marathon or nearby, when the explosion happened!) Allah knows better than I.
Reply – Stu, you said you are from America or the west? Where do you actually live and call home, then, because rape happens every five minutes or even more than that in America. I think you are not telling me the whole truth…? I believe it was also, Stu, but I could be mistaken who said his wife was at the Boston Marathon or nearby, when the explosion happened!) Allah knows better than I.
<<
<<
Actually, when you read the saying, it illustrates that the Prophet was telling men, if they beat their wives they shouldn't sleep with them, which is like a deterrent.<<<<< I
These two above statements reveal to me that you believe that the man has authority over the woman. Do you think men have some sort of special knowledge and moral authority to dictate to women how they should dress? Are women so inferior that they need a man to tell her, with authority to beat her if she doesn't comply?
1) Yes, man has a responsibility to care for and protect his woman, or wife or daughters. 2) I was obviously speaking about the past (that men should beat their wives; is something not done by regular Muslim men anymore, which I speak about elsewhere, probably I mentioned this to him , so I'll check the details of other emails), which is 1400 years ago, if you would pay closer attention when reading, you wouldn’t be asking this question; I am a self-respecting and good woman, therefore, I do take care to dress modestly and believe many women would do so, if they believed it was for their own good; problem is many women believe it is beneficial to dress provocatively, though it is 2013, so they can find a companion who will love them; this is the wrong approach, but they think it will work. Women are raised from childhood to believe that their looks are the most important thing when it comes to finding love. Society also encourages women by the magazines, advertising, fashion shows, etc. to like to dress in the latest fashions and spend their earnings on clothing and makeup, and accessories, so they can be trendy and this will compensate for their feelings of ugliness, shortcomings in appearance or skills, etc. Many women are not following the crowd and are brainy enough to shun at least some of the unnecessary and frivolous spending on new clothing and instead care about more important matters. They also would seem to have more self-respect and dignity than someone who needs to seek approval from others. There are Western women who boycott products or companies they believe exploit women in sexually suggestive ways, or abuse workers (e.g. Calvin Klein becasue of its ads, is sometimes boycotted by individual women, others which employ girls in sweat shops). 3) “No” men don’t have “some sort of special knowledge” and I can’t imagine what you think that I or anyone would think that would be?? Women and men both have their duties to family, society and God. They will also be equally rewarded for their good deeds. There isn’t a huge movement among Muslim women to have the Quran changed, because they understand that Islam says they are equal in the sight of God and before the law. Women wear hijab (the Islamic clothing, a long outer garment or hijab and cover their hair with a veil, not out of fear of the husband, but in obedience to God, who demands it; if they don’t, no one should force them, or abuse them in any case. There are many uncovered women in GCC and also many covered women. Many women have grandmothers who didn’t cover in their youth, but their mothers began to cover and now they also may or may not cover; it is their choice. In Saudi Arabia and Iran women cover as per their government’s laws. In France women don’t wear niqaab as it is banned. Therefore, it is also governments which dictate the type of hijab. Even non-Muslims now can tell women how they should dress, which is definitely not a sign of absolute freedom of choice, either. Whether the government is Islamic or applies some of the sharia, or is a secular or democratic government, women are finding that they are being forced to demand their freedom of choice and conscience. All the power and God’s help to them, I say. Note that in Saudi Arabia, actually, not all women are forced to keep on the face veil, though it is something the government prefers (and it is the law - which is sometimes ignored) women do, as they are asked to abide by sharia law (almost but not quite in every area of life). No non-Muslims are permitted to enter Mecca, but other than that, they are free to travel the Kingdom, with visas. It is as other countries concerned with security so people are required to have jobs and place of employment or a valid reason for being in the Kingdom, or they can be expelled. One might see Americans as well as Indonesians or Chinese living and working in Saudi Arabia, and they do so with respect for the law in most cases.
1) Yes, man has a responsibility to care for and protect his woman, or wife or daughters. 2) I was obviously speaking about the past (that men should beat their wives; is something not done by regular Muslim men anymore, which I speak about elsewhere, probably I mentioned this to him , so I'll check the details of other emails), which is 1400 years ago, if you would pay closer attention when reading, you wouldn’t be asking this question; I am a self-respecting and good woman, therefore, I do take care to dress modestly and believe many women would do so, if they believed it was for their own good; problem is many women believe it is beneficial to dress provocatively, though it is 2013, so they can find a companion who will love them; this is the wrong approach, but they think it will work. Women are raised from childhood to believe that their looks are the most important thing when it comes to finding love. Society also encourages women by the magazines, advertising, fashion shows, etc. to like to dress in the latest fashions and spend their earnings on clothing and makeup, and accessories, so they can be trendy and this will compensate for their feelings of ugliness, shortcomings in appearance or skills, etc. Many women are not following the crowd and are brainy enough to shun at least some of the unnecessary and frivolous spending on new clothing and instead care about more important matters. They also would seem to have more self-respect and dignity than someone who needs to seek approval from others. There are Western women who boycott products or companies they believe exploit women in sexually suggestive ways, or abuse workers (e.g. Calvin Klein becasue of its ads, is sometimes boycotted by individual women, others which employ girls in sweat shops). 3) “No” men don’t have “some sort of special knowledge” and I can’t imagine what you think that I or anyone would think that would be?? Women and men both have their duties to family, society and God. They will also be equally rewarded for their good deeds. There isn’t a huge movement among Muslim women to have the Quran changed, because they understand that Islam says they are equal in the sight of God and before the law. Women wear hijab (the Islamic clothing, a long outer garment or hijab and cover their hair with a veil, not out of fear of the husband, but in obedience to God, who demands it; if they don’t, no one should force them, or abuse them in any case. There are many uncovered women in GCC and also many covered women. Many women have grandmothers who didn’t cover in their youth, but their mothers began to cover and now they also may or may not cover; it is their choice. In Saudi Arabia and Iran women cover as per their government’s laws. In France women don’t wear niqaab as it is banned. Therefore, it is also governments which dictate the type of hijab. Even non-Muslims now can tell women how they should dress, which is definitely not a sign of absolute freedom of choice, either. Whether the government is Islamic or applies some of the sharia, or is a secular or democratic government, women are finding that they are being forced to demand their freedom of choice and conscience. All the power and God’s help to them, I say. Note that in Saudi Arabia, actually, not all women are forced to keep on the face veil, though it is something the government prefers (and it is the law - which is sometimes ignored) women do, as they are asked to abide by sharia law (almost but not quite in every area of life). No non-Muslims are permitted to enter Mecca, but other than that, they are free to travel the Kingdom, with visas. It is as other countries concerned with security so people are required to have jobs and place of employment or a valid reason for being in the Kingdom, or they can be expelled. One might see Americans as well as Indonesians or Chinese living and working in Saudi Arabia, and they do so with respect for the law in most cases.
[A famous female who works in television in Riyadh does not cover, this shows that she is not being abused because she is not covering though she knows it is the law. She also says she is intelligent and understands Islam, therefore the reason for her lack of face veil and the reason for her makeup and hair (she partly covers her hair only) is that she prefers to dress and behave in a manner against the Sharia. Yet she accuses the Sheikh of being extremist and against the rights of women. She should not defend her tendency to exaggerate the govt's crimes against her, when she is able to do so on national television and was not in any way abused (prior to her statements; in the video on YouTub). Whether or not she is still alive is for the audience to answer, I have no interest in the question or her campaign against sharia.]
<<
well indeed, some of the topics might be irrelevant. I'm not sure that slavery today is irrelevant in the Muslim world. There are some countries in the world that claim to be based on sharia who have not outlawed slavery. It is strange to me that God would condone slavery by giving rules for its management if he knew that ultimately these rules would be irrelevant. Slavery has become irrelevant in most of the world because all humans have come to understand that slavery is abhorrent. Concubinage and, for the most part polygamy, have also become irrelevant for the same reasons.
Allah permitted slavery in His wisdom, but He revealed to the prophet on many occasions the great reward for freeing slaves. It was also forbidden to make a free person a slave as per the prophet Muhammad’s saying (revise – find direct quote). Yes, it is absolutely the case that all people have come to see that it is a practice of past ages, and most communities, who are modern don’t even think about slavery anymore, because it is so far from our idea of equality and human brotherhood. Islam definitely had something to do with the almost complete eradication of slavery; as I mention, people in the more modern Islamic countries still today express interest to free the remaining slaves in such countries as Sudan or Nigeria, where people often live in desert tribes, away from modern life. It is likely some slave owners are Christians.There are hardly slaves in the cities or towns anymore, though one might be able to find some (How many? I can’t honestly say I know, nor do I think anyone knows, but maybe there is someone who can study this; it would be a worthwhile endeavor for some Islamic nations to do so, maybe one day, they will allot resources to this question). We realize that even Saudi Arabia is not a perfect model of an Islamic nation, and while some people claim that leaders such as Ghaddafi promoted women’s rights in their own country, it isn’t the case, but a false understanding of what he was actually promoting, which was the disrespect and enslavement of women (and men) to his ideology (a kind of socialism). He imprisoned many innocent men and even women and boys, therefore how could it be claimed that he was “elevating” women or promoting “women’s rights”? Nonetheless, Islam encourages freeing of slaves, people free slaves voluntarily or others pay to have the slaves released (pay the price of the slave to the Sayyid (master). There was never a racist attitude in Islam however, and slaves were not only black people. Therefore, it was an economic and societal norm (which was slowly changing) and freedom for slaves necessitated understanding of Islamic teachings; this knowledge spread very far and in the epicenter there were fewer slaves than at any time in history when the Prophet died and the love for his Sunnah meant that people continued to free slaves all the time. Perhaps in some countries this didn’t progress as fast and with the fall of the Islamic Empire, though there was slave trading by Christians (which continued even to the last century in a Westward movement, to America, which was also “necessity” because the slaves helped build the country and were used as cheap labor, etc. their humanity was questioned, and only until very recently in the West the law stated that black person is only 3/5 of a white person. The government (not the Bible) probably along with some encouragement from religious leaders taught that because the bible says that God put a mark on the son of Adam who killed his brother, eg. Cane killed Abel, which was taught in some circles or churches as the origin of black people. Muslims were forbidden from racism, racist remarks or racist attitudes and hatred of people based on race (xenophobia, etc.). No doubt this is in part why Muslims had no animosity or thoughts of enslavement because of race. In Arabia race wasn’t a factor in enslavement, but wars and the capture and necessary development of a system (long ago) necessitated that tribes and societies find a way to deal with their war captives without necessitating killing all the men and boys. People in communities must have thought of the need to use bonds such as chains, and if necessary beating with whips to discipline incompliant or disobedient slaves. Women were easier to control than men because they are weak, and obviously men liked to use women for sex, so that was also part of the social order in many societies long ago. One wonders how people in societies without slavery managed to defeat their enemies and avoid enslaving them. Did they kill almost all their enemies? Did they prefer to let them go after paying money? Or did they have to kill them because there was no other option, and their enemies would sooner or later come back to fight them again, with stronger more determined forces? Or did they make peace with their enemies so that there was no need for retaliation on either side, and how did they accomplish this? I can try to imagine what people long ago would have considered before either agreeing to enslave their enemies or to make peace with them. Even the environmental conditions, whether there was food enough for different tribes or nations (as in American Indian and Canadian native societies long ago, different “nations” or “clans” and “tribes” often differed or competed for food and grazing land, etc) It was probably a matter of survival that they didn’t take slaves but probably killed most of their enemies; maybe they also killed most of the women and children, which is the popular idea we have of turmoil in the “old west” between Indians and white people, and what occurred between many different native Indian groups (tribes or nations).
********
Allah permitted slavery in His wisdom, but He revealed to the prophet on many occasions the great reward for freeing slaves. It was also forbidden to make a free person a slave as per the prophet Muhammad’s saying (revise – find direct quote). Yes, it is absolutely the case that all people have come to see that it is a practice of past ages, and most communities, who are modern don’t even think about slavery anymore, because it is so far from our idea of equality and human brotherhood. Islam definitely had something to do with the almost complete eradication of slavery; as I mention, people in the more modern Islamic countries still today express interest to free the remaining slaves in such countries as Sudan or Nigeria, where people often live in desert tribes, away from modern life. It is likely some slave owners are Christians.There are hardly slaves in the cities or towns anymore, though one might be able to find some (How many? I can’t honestly say I know, nor do I think anyone knows, but maybe there is someone who can study this; it would be a worthwhile endeavor for some Islamic nations to do so, maybe one day, they will allot resources to this question). We realize that even Saudi Arabia is not a perfect model of an Islamic nation, and while some people claim that leaders such as Ghaddafi promoted women’s rights in their own country, it isn’t the case, but a false understanding of what he was actually promoting, which was the disrespect and enslavement of women (and men) to his ideology (a kind of socialism). He imprisoned many innocent men and even women and boys, therefore how could it be claimed that he was “elevating” women or promoting “women’s rights”? Nonetheless, Islam encourages freeing of slaves, people free slaves voluntarily or others pay to have the slaves released (pay the price of the slave to the Sayyid (master). There was never a racist attitude in Islam however, and slaves were not only black people. Therefore, it was an economic and societal norm (which was slowly changing) and freedom for slaves necessitated understanding of Islamic teachings; this knowledge spread very far and in the epicenter there were fewer slaves than at any time in history when the Prophet died and the love for his Sunnah meant that people continued to free slaves all the time. Perhaps in some countries this didn’t progress as fast and with the fall of the Islamic Empire, though there was slave trading by Christians (which continued even to the last century in a Westward movement, to America, which was also “necessity” because the slaves helped build the country and were used as cheap labor, etc. their humanity was questioned, and only until very recently in the West the law stated that black person is only 3/5 of a white person. The government (not the Bible) probably along with some encouragement from religious leaders taught that because the bible says that God put a mark on the son of Adam who killed his brother, eg. Cane killed Abel, which was taught in some circles or churches as the origin of black people. Muslims were forbidden from racism, racist remarks or racist attitudes and hatred of people based on race (xenophobia, etc.). No doubt this is in part why Muslims had no animosity or thoughts of enslavement because of race. In Arabia race wasn’t a factor in enslavement, but wars and the capture and necessary development of a system (long ago) necessitated that tribes and societies find a way to deal with their war captives without necessitating killing all the men and boys. People in communities must have thought of the need to use bonds such as chains, and if necessary beating with whips to discipline incompliant or disobedient slaves. Women were easier to control than men because they are weak, and obviously men liked to use women for sex, so that was also part of the social order in many societies long ago. One wonders how people in societies without slavery managed to defeat their enemies and avoid enslaving them. Did they kill almost all their enemies? Did they prefer to let them go after paying money? Or did they have to kill them because there was no other option, and their enemies would sooner or later come back to fight them again, with stronger more determined forces? Or did they make peace with their enemies so that there was no need for retaliation on either side, and how did they accomplish this? I can try to imagine what people long ago would have considered before either agreeing to enslave their enemies or to make peace with them. Even the environmental conditions, whether there was food enough for different tribes or nations (as in American Indian and Canadian native societies long ago, different “nations” or “clans” and “tribes” often differed or competed for food and grazing land, etc) It was probably a matter of survival that they didn’t take slaves but probably killed most of their enemies; maybe they also killed most of the women and children, which is the popular idea we have of turmoil in the “old west” between Indians and white people, and what occurred between many different native Indian groups (tribes or nations).
I definitely have no arguments (which justify) (for) slavery today (in most places) though, it is just that from a purely historical and anthropological perspective I can understand it much better than if I were to merely judge people - whether ancient or modern (modern in the sense that they exist today).
We don’t equate slavery of women with polygamy. It isn’t true that all people agree that polygamy is “abhorrent”, that is your own feeling and belief. Many women today accept polygamy, and I know some. They are happy as co-wives and I have even sat and visited with them, and gone camping with women who were co-wives. Something “abhorrent” would be unnatural, and polygamy isn’t unnatural, despite your dislike of it. You come from a Western or Christian background, so it seems strange and even a hateful practice, but that is your personal feeling and belief, others do not and shouldn’t have to live life exactly as you do, nor accept your personal likes and dislikes as their own; where is the freedom of choice which Westerners and Europeans always speak about? Where is the sincerity and humility? You say your best friend committed adultery and you forgive that, but you cannot understand why some societies and people prefer marriage (which is often a religious covenant and very serious and entered with necessary forethought and care.) There are also times when women prefer their husband to have another wife, whether you can find this even remotely possible or not. The Prophet taught that women and men should take care of their bodies’ cleanliness, to shower after sexual intercourse and to respect lovemaking as a God-given right for both spouses to enjoy, to fulfill their natural desires. Polygamy, like all marriage isn’t something dirty which brings to mind images of sexual perversion or abuse. Many in the west will shake their heads at Muslims or other polygamous groups, but easily fall into adultery, fornication, homosexuality, prostitution, orgies, wife swapping and other sinful, hateful, dangerous or perverted acts. Please don’t talk down to me, it is very annoying. You are not “forceful” you are a very biased individual, as you say “biased”. At times, you contradict yourself.
When you say Muslims have "progressed" do you mean that they have become morally superior to the Quran?
“No” they are not superior in their faith, general ideas, beliefs or actions to the early Muslims nor do they have any other teaching or belief system which is superior to the Qur’an; their “progress” is the same progress which most nations and tribes have gone through, e.g. they have learned to give others their due rights, to respect individuality, to be patient in adversity, to live side by side with others in peace, they follow the laws of the land whether founded on religious or secular laws (e.g. in the GCC there are Islamic family courts, and also secular courts, because not all residents use the Islamic courts and also, secular laws don’t necessarily contradict most of the sharia(Islamic law) such as laws against stealing, drugs, trafficking, rape, physical assault, littering, disrupting the peace, violent protest, etc.) There has been scientific progress, much of it long ago, in the Muslim lands, and now the Ummah (community) is in a state of limbo, with little developments (in science or humanities) for a long time, but there is some signs of small (and also bigger) movements to “environmental protection” as you asked, and other areas of development, social welfare, women’s rights, health and education, which is an ongoing concern, since schools opened in most GCC countries in the 1920’s or so. Christian communities also spread to the GCC from neighboring countries (their homes) and have grown and have their own community and activities. I mention also the support of community groups, such as the Indian groups or the Irish expatriates for their support of the King’s handling of the crisis during the “Arab spring” and protests which turned violent in Bahrain due to the extremism of some of the local people.
The rights of others are an ongoing question, which unlike slavery is always in some state of flux, while slavery has diminished in numbers for centuries. Human rights continues to be an area of concern or interest in general; most countries have some laws which some of the people are in contest with e.g. they want changes to them. It is natural to have conflicts within society as well as with other nations. The important thing to keep in mind is to respect others right to self-determination, that some societies will develop more slowly, and the world has a restricted right to intervene, especially considering that there is a lot of power in the hands of a few. Good should be clear from evil, if nations overstep the clear limits, as defined by modern laws in respect to human rights, then something has to be done; what is done depends on factors (all of which I’m not completely familiar with as a non-expert); the ability for the nation to comply, the situation on the ground, and any number of other considerations. Is it right to immediately invade a country because there is a suspicion that it has nuclear weapons? Is it okay to bomb civilian populations to root out terrorists in another country, considering that the terrorists are far away and no immediate danger? If there are signs or suspicious movements, when and where do you attack the enemy? Etc.
Besides international terrorism, what other significant problems are there, and why does terrorism get the most attention? There is child labor, can we tackle that question as nations and how do we get nations or companies which break the law, to comply with the modern and acceptable ideas of what is permissible, as far as children and work? What about the minimum wage? Do we dictate to other countries what the minimum wage should be, or is that a completely internal matter? How can nations do better to eradicate drugs trafficking and human trafficking? Why did the USA’s “war on drugs” fail? These are just a few of the very important issues nations need to think harder about and come up with solutions. If in an age when slavery was common, yet people began to see it as an evil, especially if racism or sexism was involved, why blame Muhammad, pbuh, for the timing? It is the way the world is; some people, merely due to the environment and their geographical position, e.g. the Sahara or Antarctica might have different ideas of what is right and wrong - maybe it is too hot and dry or too cold and wet to think about anything but how one will find food for the day or mend his house? Modern nations have a much greater responsibility to the rest of the world than did the earlier peoples and nations.(This is the answer to why God left in place a system which later on (much later, in America, they adopted slavery when there wasn't any on the entire continent; there was war and massacres, but no slavery)would be "irrelevant"; slavery hardly exists today, in practise and numbers; of seven billion ppl how many are slaves? It is amazing that modern men or women who sit for hours in front of their entertainment centers can lob twenty questions about why a man 14 centuries ago didn’t eradicate slavery or amend marriage laws (actually, in some respects, he did both) and completely forbid it forever (because he was doing what God told him to) and yet, they have no qualms about buying coffee from Starbucks and equipment from Caterpillar. You’ve had since world war II to do something about Israel’s’ racism in the Middle East, but what have you done and how long will it take before you realize something has to be done? You want a deity who wants a relationship with you, will come down? God dictates the relationship; He sent a book, which you refuse to examine open-mindedly despite the proofs it contains, then you also reject God even though you once believed, merely because people changed the contents of the book you had e.g. the Bible, or because people are not living up to the dictates of their religion? You are like a child who doesn’t know how to think for himself and ask why about everything; try to formulate some theories of your own that can explain why slavery was or wasn’t abolished forever, 1400 years ago, or something logical (not emotional) about why men are or are not permitted to marry more than one wife. If people have anything new or original to bring to the table, I’ll gladly examine it, as for old prejudices and racist rants, I’m not going to entertain such questions. People can see my videos, comments and read the blog. If you have a question, be considerate of the wording and tone of your question/message or I will ignore it. – I admit sometimes I’m tempted not to ignore such questions, but it is better if I do.
I realize quite well and often vividly (my imagination is good) how people react to Islam’s set of laws, Quranic statement, historical events, and present day Muslims, including the extremism, but I don’t think people who believe differently from Muslims have to change. They have the right and free will, which Allah gave them, to do as they like and believe as they believe. But that doesn’t change my belief that everyone on this earth has the ability to know God/Allah, and that they just have to use their minds and listen to their hearts. That can be qualified; if their minds are closed and their hearts are full of enmity towards Muslims, so that they don’t want to listen, and refuse knowledge, then it is their own fault. I don’t call that Allah’s will - that is their own determination to reject Islam and the Quran. They “will themselves” to reject God, He is always open to their belief in Him. If they just pray for guidance He will definitely guide them, but they shouldn’t pray asking Him to guide them to something which they will only agree with for a little while, because in the future, they will likely figure out (if that isn’t what Allah sent - the guidance He expects all people to follow, not something that claims to be from Him, but is falsehood), and then they won’t find what Allah has destined for them not to find (because they asked for something and prayed for something which He didn’t send). Pray only to be guided to the truth, not a specific religion (other than Islam, which is the truth; though you don’t have to call it by name, you can if you want to) People often are certain that what they believe is the truth, but “there is only one truth” – for certain, one is truly astray when one believes in a falsehood, only a claim to truth.
Nonmuslims complain about immigration today, but there was a time, we vividly imagine it in books like Roots, when the west with Europe and the Arabs earned wealth by transporting and selling black people as slaves to the Americas; literally forcing them to go there, out of complete disregard for their wishes, or even families. They were, before that, free and made slaves. This is one of the practices of old which Islam prohibited – Muhammad, pbuh, said, “………………[editing] ….”
(I must apologize here for not providing a proper quote, it is just that I have many books, but don't know where the hadith/saying I am looking for can be found, if any Muslims (or even non-Muslim) reader can help I would really appreciate it, until I find it I am searching. [I had previously asked for help from an Islamic website, but they turned me down, becasue they only help people (non-Muslims) with dawa; I thought, I'm kind of qualified for their help, but they denied me, oh well...] I will take a break after the next Post, then I will have time to fix some of the missing references or indirect quotes, which need to be direct quotes, etc.(despite the previous setback, I have now found a female scholar willing to help me with islamic knowledge, and references, etc.) Unfortunately too, I can't do much better as far as the look of the blog, no expertise there!)
DD
No comments:
Post a Comment