CONGRATULATING AN ATHEIST

Normally, when I meet an atheist, the first thing I like to do is to congratulate him and say, " My special congratulations to you", because most of the people who believe in God are doing blind belief - he is a Christian, because his father is a Christian; he is a Hindu, because his father is a Hindu; the majority of the people in the world are blindly following the religion of their fathers. An atheist, on the other hand, even though he may belong to a religious family, uses his intellect to deny the existence of God; what ever concept or qualities of God he may have learnt in his religion may not seem to be logical to him.

My Muslim brothers may question me, "Zakir, why are you congratulating an atheist?" The reason that I am congratulating an atheist is because he agrees with the first part of the Shahada i.e. the Islamic Creed, ‘La ilaaha’ - meaning ‘there is no God’.

So half my job is already done; now the only part left is ‘il lallah’ i.e. ‘BUT ALLAH’ which I shall do Insha Allah. With others (who are not atheists) I have to first remove from their minds the wrong concept of God they may have and then put the correct concept of one true God.

LOGICAL CONCEPT OF GOD

My first question to the atheist will be: "What is the definition of God?" For a person to say there is no God, he should know what is the meaning of God. If I hold a book and say that ‘this is a pen’, for the opposite person to say, ‘it is not a pen’, he should know what is the definition of a pen, even if he does not know nor is able to recognise or identify the object I am holding in my hand. For him to say this is not a pen, he should at least know what a pen means. Similarly for an atheist to say ‘there is no God’, he should at least know the concept of God. His concept of God would be derived from the surroundings in which he lives. The god that a large number of people worship has got human qualities - therefore he does not believe in such a god. Similarly a Muslim too does not and should not believe in such false gods.

If a non-Muslim believes that Islam is a merciless religion with something to do with terrorism; a religion which does not give rights to women; a religion which contradicts science; in his limited sense that non-Muslim is correct to reject such Islam. The problem is he has a wrong picture of Islam. Even I reject such a false picture of Islam, but at the same time, it becomes my duty as a Muslim to present the correct picture of Islam to that non-Muslim i.e. Islam is a merciful religion, it gives equal rights to the women, it is not incompatible with logic, reason and science; if I present the correct facts about Islam, that non-Muslim may Inshallah accept Islam.

Similarly the atheist rejects the false gods and the duty of every Muslim is to present the correct concept of God which he shall Insha Allah not refuse.

(You may refer to my article, ‘Concept of God in Islam’, for more details)

QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE

The methods of proving the existence of God with usage of the material provided in the ‘Concept of God in Islam’ to an atheist may satisfy some but not all.

Many atheists demand a scientific proof for the existence of God. I agree that today is the age of science and technology. Let us use scientific knowledge to kill two birds with one stone, i.e. to prove the existence of God and simultaneously prove that the Qur’an is a revelation of God.

If a new object or a machine, which no one in the world has ever seen or heard of before, is shown to an atheist or any person and then a question is asked, " Who is the first person who will be able to provide details of the mechanism of this unknown object? After little bit of thinking, he will reply, ‘the creator of that object.’ Some may say ‘the producer’ while others may say ‘the manufacturer.’ What ever answer the person gives, keep it in your mind, the answer will always be either the creator, the producer, the manufacturer or some what of the same meaning, i.e. the person who has made it or created it. Don’t grapple with words, whatever answer he gives, the meaning will be same, therefore accept it.

SCIENTIFIC FACTS MENTIONED IN THE QUR’AN: for details on this subject please refer to my book, ‘THE QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE – COMPATIBLE OR INCOMPATIBLE?

THEORY OF PROBABILITY

In mathematics there is a theory known as ‘Theory of Probability’. If you have two options, out of which one is right, and one is wrong, the chances that you will chose the right one is half, i.e. one out of the two will be correct. You have 50% chances of being correct. Similarly if you toss a coin the chances that your guess will be correct is 50% (1 out of 2) i.e. 1/2. If you toss a coin the second time, the chances that you will be correct in the second toss is again 50% i.e. half. But the chances that you will be correct in both the tosses is half multiplied by half (1/2 x 1/2) which is equal to 1/4 i.e. 50% of 50% which is equal to 25%. If you toss a coin the third time, chances that you will be correct all three times is (1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2) that is 1/8 or 50% of 50% of 50% that is 12½%.

A dice has got six sides. If you throw a dice and guess any number between 1 to 6, the chances that your guess will be correct is 1/6. If you throw the dice the second time, the chances that your guess will be correct in both the throws is (1/6 x 1/6) which is equal to 1/36. If you throw the dice the third time, the chances that all your three guesses are correct is (1/6 x 1/6 x 1/6) is equal to 1/216 that is less than 0.5 %.

Let us apply this theory of probability to the Qur’an, and assume that a person has guessed all the information that is mentioned in the Qur’an which was unknown at that time. Let us discuss the probability of all the guesses being simultaneously correct.

At the time when the Qur’an was revealed, people thought the world was flat, there are several other options for the shape of the earth. It could be triangular, it could be quadrangular, pentagonal, hexagonal, heptagonal, octagonal, spherical, etc. Lets assume there are about 30 different options for the shape of the earth. The Qur’an rightly says it is spherical, if it was a guess the chances of the guess being correct is 1/30.

The light of the moon can be its own light or a reflected light. The Qur’an rightly says it is a reflected light. If it is a guess, the chances that it will be correct is 1/2 and the probability that both the guesses i.e the earth is spherical and the light of the moon is reflected light is 1/30 x 1/2 = 1/60.

Further, the Qur’an also mentions every living thing is made of water. Every living thing can be made up of either wood, stone, copper, aluminum, steel, silver, gold, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, oil, water, cement, concrete, etc. The options are say about 10,000. The Qur’an rightly says that everything is made up of water. If it is a guess, the chances that it will be correct is 1/10,000 and the probability of all the three guesses i.e. the earth is spherical, light of moon is reflected light and everything is created from water being correct is 1/30 x 1/2 x 1/10,000 = 1/60,000 which is equal to about .0017%.

The Qur’an speaks about hundreds of things that were not known to men at the time of its revelation. Only in three options the result is .0017%. I leave it upto you, to work out the probability if all the hundreds of the unknown facts were guesses, the chances of all of them being correct guesses simultaneously and there being not a single wrong guess. It is beyond human capacity to make all correct guesses without a single mistake, which itself is sufficient to prove to a logical person that the origin of the Qur’an is Divine.
 

CREATOR IS THE AUTHOR OF THE QUR’AN

The only logical answer to the question as to who could have mentioned all these scientific facts 1400 years ago before they were discovered, is exactly the same answer initially given by the atheist or any person, to the question who will be the first person who will be able to tell the mechanism of the unknown object. It is the ‘CREATOR’, the producer, the Manufacturer of the whole universe and its contents. In the English language He is ‘God’, or more appropriate in the Arabic language, ‘ALLAH’.

QUR’AN IS A BOOK OF SIGNS AND NOT SCIENCE

Let me remind you that the Qur’an is not a book of Science, ‘S-C-I-E-N-C-E’ but a book of Signs ‘S-I-G-N-S’ i.e. a book of ayaats. The Qur’an contains more than 6,000 ayaats, i.e. ‘signs’, out of which more than a thousand speak about Science. I am not trying to prove that the Qur’an is the word of God using scientific knowledge as a yard stick because any yardstick is supposed to be more superior than what is being checked or verified. For us Muslims the Qur’an is the Furqan i.e. criteria to judge right from wrong and the ultimate yardstick which is more superior to scientific knowledge.

But for an educated man who is an atheist, scientific knowledge is the ultimate test which he believes in. We do know that science many a times takes ‘U’ turns, therefore I have restricted the examples only to scientific facts which have sufficient proof and evidence and not scientific theories based on assumptions. Using the ultimate yardstick of the atheist, I am trying to prove to him that the Qur’an is the word of God and it contains the scientific knowledge which is his yardstick which was discovered recently, while the Qur’an was revealed 1400 year ago. At the end of the discussion, we both come to the same conclusion that God though superior to science, is not incompatible with it.
 

SCIENCE IS ELIMINATING MODELS OF GOD BUT NOT GOD

Francis Bacon, the famous philosopher, has rightly said that a little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but an in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God. Scientists today are eliminating models of God, but they are not eliminating God. If you translate this into Arabic, it is La illaha illal la, There is no god, (god with a small ‘g’ that is fake god) but God (with a capital ‘G’).

Surah Fussilat:

"Soon We will show them our signs in the (farthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things?"

[Al-Quran 41:53]

Written By Dr.Zakir Naik

http://www.irf.net/Atheism.html

Childish talk.

... please dont start

The problem with Naik's claim is that the Quran does not make scientific claims, because there is nothing stated scientifically. You will find very few western scientists willing to say that the Quran contains specific scientific claims. In addition, to the extent that we can guess at the interpretations of various vague verses, the science contained therein has obvious errors.

Take Naik's claim about Muhammad (in the Quran) saying that every living thing is composed partially from water, for example, which is in fact true. But the Greeks knew this long before, and in fact almost anyone who has observed animals and plants can see that they all need water, and therefore water must be a part of their composition. There is nothing miraculous about this piece of information. Naik makes it sound impressive, but I'm not impressed.

He also says that the Quran says that the moon contains reflected light, when in fact all it says is that the moon gives light (I looked at 5 different translations of the Quran), and does not identify it as reflected. This is therefore an unsubstantiated claim and cannot be used to reference a scientific miracle in the Quran. In any case the Greeks already knew that the moon was reflected light 1000 years before the Quran.

Why bother with the rest? He has no credibility.

you see this thing up there, ranging from the creator of universe writing a book to the least of trash is exactly what atheists dont believe/buy....

onetrack:
The problem with Naik's claim is that the Quran does not make scientific claims, because there is nothing stated scientifically. You will find very few western scientists willing to say that the Quran contains specific scientific claims. In addition, to the extent that we can guess at the interpretations of various vague verses, the science contained therein has obvious errors.

Western science and religion is not something that goes hand in hand, whenever a scientist brings up the issue of religion in modern days he is disregarded from then.


The Greeks had a theory, so did many others, but what is the probability of islam picking the right one. If you read the post carefully you'd see where he mentioned the issue of probability.

Take Naik's claim about Muhammad (in the Quran) saying that every living thing is composed partially from water, for example, which is in fact true. But the Greeks knew this long before, and in fact almost anyone who has observed animals and plants can see that they all need water, and therefore water must be a part of their composition. There is nothing miraculous about this piece of information. Naik makes it sound impressive, but I'm not impressed.

I beg to differ.

"By the sun and its radiant light, and the moon that trails (and reflects) its light. By the day that magnifies and glorifies (جلاها) its brightness. (The Noble Quran, 91:1-3)"

'' Blessed is He who has placed in the sky great stars and placed therein a [burning] lamp and luminous moon.'' (25:61)

Again the Greeks had a theory, so did many others, but the Quran picked this 1400 years ago. Again what is the probability? If you combine the probability of the Quran picking the correct theories in all these aspects I'm sure it's..... I don't even want to do the math.

He also says that the Quran says that the moon contains reflected light, when in fact all it says is that the moon gives light (I looked at 5 different translations of the Quran), and does not identify it as reflected. This is therefore an unsubstantiated claim and cannot be used to reference a scientific miracle in the Quran. In any case the Greeks already knew that the moon was reflected light 1000 years before the Quran.

Doesn't he? Mate, you refuse to bother with the rest because you don't want to. Stop trying as hard as possible to reject faith. if truly you are in search of the truth I suggest you read the book he recommended, I'm sure you can get it for free some where online.

Why bother with the rest? He has no credibility.

Like he said, the Quran is a book of facts, not of science.

johnydon22:
you see this thing up there, ranging from the creator of universe writing a book to the least of trash is exactly what atheists dont believe/buy....

Did you even read it or are you just Trying to sound relevant to the atheist world, if so, what part of the article caught your attention. Please quote.

KellamLeTorneau:


Did you even read it or are you just Trying to sound relevant to the atheist world, if so, what part of the article caught your attention. Please quote.

You see, i wouldn't waste time picking it one after the other... read my post again. ....moreover do i even need to start addressing a copy and paste?

johnydon22:


You see, i wouldn't waste time picking it one after the other... read my post again. ....moreover do i even need to start addressing a copy and paste?

I see you haven't changed since our last encounter. People like you I like to call "illogical atheists". you have no business here, like the first part talked about logic and intellect which I doubt you possess. People like you aren't even atheists for the sake of it, you're just trend followers or rather hollywood chipolatas.

KellamLeTorneau:


I see you haven't changed since our last encounter. People like you I like to call "illogical atheists". you have no business here, like the first part talked about logic and intellect which I doubt you possess. People like you aren't even atheists for the sake of it, you're just trend followers or rather hollywood chipolatas.

lol really? now thats ad hominems... i'd rather let it pass. think you are beginning to sound emotional...

johnydon22:


lol really? now thats ad hominems... i'd rather let it pass. think you are beginning to sound emotional...

Ad hominems are used by the unintelligent, my attack on your character is justified. In my long dicussions with you, I arrived at the conclusion that you are illogical. Further proof is that instead of you reading the contents you refused to consider it because it was a "copy and paste". Is that how your logic works? So its not the message you're interested in?

Emotional? Please...as illogical as you are I admit there are people far more illogical than you, and even they couldn't stir up my emotions.

KellamLeTorneau:


Ad hominems are used by the unintelligent, my attack on your character is justified. In my long dicussions with you, I arrived at the conclusion that you are illogical. Further proof is that instead of you reading the contents you refused to consider it because it was a "copy and paste". Is that how your logic works? So its not the message you're interested in?

Emotional? Please...as illogical as you are I admit there are people far more illogical than you, and even they couldn't stir up my emotions.

You like the word illogical don't you?, . . . .Lol.. one thing i don't do on nairaland is exchange personal words and I won't still stoop that low, you can be the champion on that... when i see something worth refuting hewn from Your own reasoning then i can spare time to refute.

M yet to recall having any discussions with you.. Just reading these things am sure its not hard deducting who really is illogical and emotional about it. ... ok go on with your ad hominems... ..

johnydon22:


You like the word illogical don't you?, . . . .Lol.. one thing i don't do on nairaland is exchange personal words and I won't still stoop that low, you can be the champion on that... when i see something worth refuting hewn from Your own reasoning then i can spare time to refute.

M yet to recall having any discussions with you.. Just reading these things am sure its not hard deducting who really is illogical and emotional about it. ... ok go on with your ad hominems... ..

Ah yes! Illogical, I expected you to notice it, not as an insult but the word that best describes you. Whenever I describe you you say I'm insulting you. Its funny how your one dimensional mind tells you we haven't had any discussions before when we've had many. Just another proof of your lack of understanding. Like I said, you have no business here.you can't refute anything here because its past your level of comprehension. Indeed, deducing the illogical is not hard at all, Johnny.

KellamLeTorneau:



Again the Greeks had a theory, so did many others, but the Quran picked this 1400 years ago. Again what is the probability? If you combine the probability of the Quran picking the correct theories in all these aspects I'm sure it's..... I don't even want to do the math.

It was known to the Greeks over thousand of years before the Koran was written. The ancient Greeks went as far as knowing that the stars were distant suns. They knew that moon reflects the light from the sun and wrote it down over a thousand years before it was mentioned in the Koran, I bet we should all go and start worshiping the Greek Gods for their wonderful revelations.

Like he said, the Quran is a book of facts, not of science.

Facts that others already know? There is no new knowledge or revealed fact about anything that is found in the Koran, so I wonder what makes it special, everything it talks about others knew it already.

KellamLeTorneau:


The Greeks had a theory, so did many others, but what is the probability of islam picking the right one. If you read the post carefully you'd see where he mentioned the issue of probability.

I beg to differ.

"By the sun and its radiant light, and the moon that trails (and reflects) its light. By the day that magnifies and glorifies (جلاها) its brightness. (The Noble Quran, 91:1-3)"

'' Blessed is He who has placed in the sky great stars and placed therein a [burning] lamp and luminous moon.'' (25:61)

Nothing here suggests that the moon is reflecting the light from the sun. Adding 'and reflects' in parenthesis is not something found in the five translations I just consulted. It's a very selective interpretation of vague verses. See all the 'predictions' that Nostradamus made which turned out to be 'true' only because people interpreted his verses in a particular way.

Doesn't he? Mate, you refuse to bother with the rest because you don't want to. Stop trying as hard as possible to reject faith. if truly you are in search of the truth I suggest you read the book he recommended, I'm sure you can get it for free some where online.

Please recognize that there are even many Muslim scholars who have little regard for Naik. Why should I?

By the way, I have no faith. I regard faith as actually a bad quality to have, because it means that you believe in something for which there is no proof. The claims made by the Quran and Bible have been thoroughly debunked. At the end they are just books written by men.

I was reading till I got to the part where it says everyone has equal rights in Islam, how come only the men are allowed to marry 4 wives?

onetrack:


Nothing here suggests that the moon is reflecting the light from the sun. Adding 'and reflects' in parenthesis is not something found in the five translations I just consulted. It's a very selective interpretation of vague verses. See all the 'predictions' that Nostradamus made which turned out to be 'true' only because people interpreted his verses in a particular way.

What makes you think this is not the way it was meant to be interpreted?


And there are many muslim scholars who think all apostates must die. That's none of my business.

Please recognize that there are even many Muslim scholars who have little regard for Naik. Why should I?

I know you have no faith, but faith in the right thing is not a bad thing, like he said in his article religion is like the human beings users manual? Which of the Qurans claims have been debunked?

By the way, I have no faith. I regard faith as actually a bad quality to have, because it means that you believe in something for which there is no proof. The claims made by the Quran and Bible have been thorough

ly debunked. At the end they are just books written by men.

dalaman:


It was known to the Greeks over thousand of years before the Koran was written. The ancient Greeks went as far as knowing that the stars were distant suns. They knew that moon reflects the light from the sun and wrote it down over a thousand years before it was mention in the Koran, I bet we should all go and start worshiping the Greek Gods for their wonderful revelations.
.

No it wasn't known, the had a theory like many others did, but how did Muhammad the illiterate who couldn't read or write stumble upon the right one? The Quran also mentions how stars are like lamps.

Facts that others already know? There is no new knowledge or revealed fact about anything that is found in the Koran, so I wonder what makes it special, everything it talks about others knew it already

But yet it has all the right theories. How?

freecocoa:
I was reading till I got to the part where it says everyone has equal rights in Islam, how come only the men are allowed to marry 4 wives?

The Quran permits to have 4 wives, it's not a command. This started after a war and there was shortage of men and the women and orphans could not fend for them selves, so God permitted polygamy. Under certain conditions. Note that islam is the only religion that encourages monogamy and restricts marriage to only 4. If you're a christian or Jew or Buddhist I'd like to see where you got monogamy from, as according to the bible one can marry as many as he pleases, such was the belief as well in ancient Arabia until islam,

Now the condition for in Islam are:

1- To deal justly among the wives. This is limited with the human capability; it includes being just in food, clothes, housing, interest and treatment. However the Quran denotes that it is very difficult: "...if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or that which your right hands possess" (an-Nisa, 4/3). So if there is a fear that one cannot deal justly or one can oppress, then the principle of being content with one woman becomes valid. However, justice does not include issues like liking, inclination of the heart and love, because they cannot be controlled. Islam does not place a burden on man greater than he can bear. However, it is forbidden to incline to one of the wives extremely and deprive the others from love. The following is stated in a verse: "Ye are never able to do justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire: but turn not away (from a woman) altogether, so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air).” (an-Nisa, 4/129).

When the two verses above are evaluated, we can draw the conclusion that polygamy is not an essential rule but a permission that can be used when extraordinary conditions are present.

2- To be able to maintain the family. In Islam, it is necessary for a man who wants to marry one woman or more to be able to meet the eating, drinking, clothing and housing expenses of her or them. The Prophet (PBUH) said the following: O young men! Those among you who can support a wife should marry " (Bukhari, Sawm, 10, Nikah, 2, 3, 19; Muslim, Nikhh, 1,3; Abu Dawud, Nikah, I; Ibn Majah, Nikah, ; Nasai, Siyam, 43). There is no doubt that the hardship of marriage lies in the expenses of the wife.

You can read more about Islamic polygamy here:
http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/what-are-conditions-polygamy

KellamLeTorneau:

No it wasn't known, the had a theory like many others did, but how did Muhammad the illiterate who couldn't read or write stumble upon the right one? The Quran also mentions how stars are like lamps.

It only remains a claim that Mohammed was an illiterate but that aside. It was known by the ancient Greeks, so it wasn't a new knowledge. I just went through some other translations and discovered that most translations are actually different from the one he used. Based on majority of translations it can be clearly seen that the verse has nothing to do with the moon reflecting the light of the sun.


Sahih International

By the sun and its brightness, And [by] the moon when it follows it. And [by] the day when it displays it Quran, 91:1-3


Yusuf Ali
By the Sun and his (glorious) splendour; By the Moon as she follows him; By the Day as it shows up (the Sun's) glory;

Shakir
I swear by the sun and its brilliance, And the day when it shows it, By the day when it glorifieth him.

Daryabadi

By the sun and his morning bright-ness, By the moon, when she followeth him, By the day when it glorifieth him.

Wahiduddin Khan
By the sun and its rising brightness, and by the moon as it follows it, and by the day as it reveals its glory


It we are to go by majority of the translations the Koran does not even say anything about the moon reflecting it's light.

But yet it has all the right theories. How?

Which right theories? Based on other translation we can conclude that Niak was just trying to be fraudulent. Because majority of translations do not say anything about the moon reflecting the light of the sun in anyway.

Really? How is that a claim? What other evidence do you have to prove he isn't. That is a fact.

dalaman:


It only remains a claim that Mohammed was an illiterate but that aside. It was known by the ancient Greeks, so it wasn't a new knowledge. I just went through some other translations and discovered that most translations are actually different from the one he used. Based on majority of translations it can be clearly seen that the verse has nothing to do with the moon reflecting the light of the sun.

Sahih International

By the sun and its brightness, And [by] the moon when it follows it. And [by] the day when it displays it Quran, 91:1-3


Yusuf Ali
By the Sun and his (glorious) splendour; By the Moon as she follows him; By the Day as it shows up (the Sun's) glory;

[b]Shakir
I swear by the sun and its brilliance, And the day when it shows it, By the day when it glorifieth him.

Daryabadi
[/b]By the sun and his morning bright-ness, By the moon, when she followeth him, By the day when it glorifieth him.

[b]Wahiduddin Khan
By the sun and its rising brightness. By the sun and its rising brightness, and by the moon as it follows it, and by the day as it reveals its glory


It we are to go by majority of the translations the Koran does not even say anything about the moon reflecting it's light.

There are different translations of the Quran and there are also different interpretations. Verses have to be translated then interpreted to understand how it applies to our lives. So if I choose to interpret it that way, how can you prove it wasn't supposed to be interpreted that way?


That's your atheist opinion and MIS interpretation, there's a difference between translation and interpretation. E.g there are verses that say kill the christians and Jews, that is the translation, but the interpretation is an entirely different thing.

Which right theories? Based on other translation we can conclude that Niak was just trying to be fraudulent. Because majority of translations do not say anything about the moon reflecting the light of the sun in anyway.

KellamLeTorneau:
Really? How is that a claim? What other evidence do you have to prove he isn't. That is a fact.

What are you talking about?

There are different translations of the Quran and there are also different interpretations. Verses have to be translated then interpreted to understand how it applies to our lives. So if I choose to interpret it that way, how can you prove it wasn't supposed to be interpreted that way?

This proves my point exactly that the Koran is just a book written by men as such men will have to translate it differently and interpret it differently as well. Nothing in the Koran suggest it is divine in anyway. Based on the majority of other translations we can see that it was not even talking about the moon reflecting the light of the sun. The translation you used seem to be an outlier and hence it should be discarded since it goes far off from majority of the other translations. I can't prove that it is not supposed to be interpreted in a particular way because like everything in religion, you guys just keep making things up and giving it your own personal interpretations. It can clearly be seen from the different translations that the people are translating it according to their own wishes and making it agree with their own opinions.

That's your atheist opinion and MIS interpretation, there's a difference between translation and interpretation. E.g there are verses that say kill the christians and Jews, that is the translation, but the interpretation is an entirely different thing.

I didn't translate those verses, I only showed you what other translations have stated and it comes nothing close to the moon reflecting the light of the sun. It says nothing like that. As for the part about Muslims killing Jews and Christians the actual verse might truly mean that Muslims are to kill the Jews and Christians but the Muslims living today will have to interpret it differently, because they know that killing Jews and Christians is impossible. If they try it there will be no Muslim on earth today. So they will have to re-translate it or re-interpret it to suit the realities on ground. Making things as you go is the life blood of all religions, that is why there are many different sects and many different interpretations because everything is always based on the opinion of others. Like any man made thing there is no universally accepted interpretation of anything, it always differs.

dalaman:


What are you talking about?

You said the fact that Muhammad was an illiterate is a claim?


Yes, and there's a standard way of interpretation using Hadith and other sources and the circumstance the verse was revealed under. It's a very delicate study, not every can interprete the Quran, just because you can translate doesn't mean you have the knowledge to interprete.

This proves my point exactly that the Koran is just a book written by men as such men will have to translate it differently and interpret it differently as well. Nothing in the Koran suggest it is divine in anyway. Based on the majority of other translations we can see that it was not even talking about the moon reflecting the light of the sun. The translation you used seem to be an outlier and hence it should be discarded since it goes far off from majority of the other translations. I can't prove that it is not supposed to be interpreted in a particular way because like everything in religion, you guys just keep making things up and giving it your own personal interpretations. It can clearly be seen from the different translations that the people are translating it according to their own wishes and making it agree with their own opinions.

The Prophet (saw) warns that whoever makes up or innovates in Islam is not one of us. People who innovate or translate in accordance with their twisted beliefs are therefore not muslims. Also, read:
On the authority of Abu 'Abdullah al-Nu'man bin Bashir (ra) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah(sas) say:

"The halal is clear and the haram is clear, and between them are matters unclear that are unknown to most people. Whoever is wary of these unclear matters has absolved his religion and honor. And whoever indulges in them has indulged in the haram. It is like a shepherd who herds his sheep too close to preserved sanctuary, and they will eventually graze in it. Every king has a sanctuary, and the sanctuary of Allah is what He has made haram. There lies within the body a piece of flesh (the heart). If it is sound, the whole body is sound; and if it is corrupted, the whole body is corrupted. Verily this piece is the heart."
[Bukhari & Muslim]



Yes, you quoted a translation whilst I was interpreting.

I didn't translate those verses, I only showed you what other translations have stated and it comes nothing close to the moon reflecting the light of the sun. It says nothing like that. As for the part about Muslims killing Jews and Christians the actual verse might truly mean that Muslims are to kill the Jews and Christians but the Muslims living today will have to interpret it differently, because they know that killing Jews and Christians is impossible. If they try it there will be no Muslim on earth today. So they will have to re-translate it or re-interpret it to suit the realities on ground. Making things as you go is the life blood of all religions, that is why there are many different sects and many different interpretations because everything is always based on the opinion of others. Like any man made thing there is no universally accepted interpretation of anything, it always differs.

You can't interprete the verse about killing the people of the book in that sense because other sources like the Hadith prove that's not what it means, considering the prophet lived peacefully with them and his Neighbour was a Jew. And just because they have the power and number doesn't mean they will win just like the battle of Badr proves. Again part of islams uniqueness is that we don't make up stuff, just like other religions are becoming tolerant of faggotry we can never be, we don't change our laws and that is probably why everyone hates us. Why change the laws of God because of the laws of man?

Op, believe me your post is already destroyed immediately Islam and quran comes in. Atheism has more to do with concept of god than religion. So you suppose to ask atheists what they understand by God and question their stance about other concept of God.

Christians deny and mostly deny the existence of greek and egypt concept of god. To them, Zeus or Ra does not exist. This too does not make them an atheist because at a point, they believe jehovah exist. Samething applicable to muslims who disblieve in other gods except Allah. Existence of gods cannot be denied. In some concepts, Nature is God. In animism, animals and plants are been worship as God. In ancient egypt and some greek civilisation, stars and planetary bodies are god. These we know and very sure that they exist. We know that nature, plants, animals, stars and planetary bodies exist. No sane man can deny existence of apotheosis kings and emperors. Sacred kings are been worship as God and they do exist or existed. Denying this is big insanity.

Atheists as been seen here are those that disbelieve and./or deny existence of Christian and Islamic concept of god while we have over 100000 concepts in the world today. Cow, snakes and elephant are gods in some culture. River, mountains and even humans are gods in some culture. Athiests telling an animist that their gods do not exist would be rule out as insane person because we all know thay snake and cow exist. Though they may disregard dogmas attached to this gods; dogma stem from religious evaluation and not concept of god. It is dogmatic to believe worshipping snakes would bring money to one pulse and insane to disbelieve that snakes does not exist because they are seen as god by some particular people. Mammon is a evil spirit according to christians scholars. Or let me say mammon is a personified deity which to atheists practically does not exist but we know what mammon is and that it does exist. Mammon is money, wealth or riches which exist. Disbelieving in the existence of mammon, nature, snakes, cow or any substantiable entity refdered to as god is oure insanity.

God exist and does not exist. This lies in how and what we think god is.

FOLYKAZE:
Op, believe me your post is already destroyed immediately Islam and quran comes in. Atheism has more to do with concept of god than religion. So you suppose to ask atheists what they understand by God and question their stance about other concept of God.

Christians deny and mostly deny the existence of greek and egypt concept of god. To them, Zeus or Ra does not exist. This too does not make them an atheist because at a point, they believe jehovah exist. Samething applicable to muslims who disblieve in other gods except Allah. Existence of gods cannot be denied. In some concepts, Nature is God. In animism, animals and plants are been worship as God. In ancient egypt and some greek civilisation, stars and planetary bodies are god. These we know and very sure that they exist. We know that nature, plants, animals, stars and planetary bodies exist. No sane man can deny existence of apotheosis kings and emperors. Sacred kings are been worship as God and they do exist or existed. Denying this is big insanity.

Atheists as been seen here are those that disbelieve and./or deny existence of Christian and Islamic concept of god while we have over 100000 concepts in the world today. Cow, snakes and elephant are gods in some culture. River, mountains and even humans are gods in some culture. Athiests telling an animist that their gods do not exist would be rule out as insane person because we all know thay snake and cow exist. Though they may disregard dogmas attached to this gods; dogma stem from religious evaluation and not concept of god. It is dogmatic to believe worshipping snakes would bring money to one pulse and insane to disbelieve that snakes does not exist because they are seen as god by some particular people. Mammon is a evil spirit according to christians scholars. Or let me say mammon is a personified deity which to atheists practically does not exist but we know what mammon is and that it does exist. Mammon is money, wealth or riches which exist. Disbelieving in the existence of mammon, nature, snakes, cow or any substantiable entity refdered to as god is oure insanity.

God exist and does not exist. This lies in how and what we think god is.

Did you even read the article at all? It addresses people who don't believe in any God, not those who believe in a god different from the Islamic God.

KellamLeTorneau:


You said the fact that Muhammad was an illiterate is a claim?

Sure, it is a claim because neither you or me can verify it.

Yes, and there's a standard way of interpretation using Hadith and other sources and the circumstance the verse was revealed under. It's a very delicate study, not every can interprete the Quran, just because you can translate doesn't mean you have the knowledge to interprete.

There is no standard way of interpreting anything, if there were there will be no divergence of opinion in the Islamic world. Most interpretations are done based mostly on the opinion of who ever is interpreting it. Different Imams and scholars have interpreted many things differently. Lets take a look at Saudi Arabia for example Scholars and Clerics in Saudi Arabi use their own personal interpretation of the Koran according to them to ban women from driving, scholars and clerics from other Arab and Islamic countries disagree with them and allow women to drive in their own countries.

The Prophet (saw) warns that whoever makes up or innovates in Islam is not one of us. People who innovate or translate in accordance with their twisted beliefs are therefore not muslims. Also, read:
On the authority of Abu 'Abdullah al-Nu'man bin Bashir (ra) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah(sas) say:

"The halal is clear and the haram is clear, and between them are matters unclear that are unknown to most people. Whoever is wary of these unclear matters has absolved his religion and honor. And whoever indulges in them has indulged in the haram. It is like a shepherd who herds his sheep too close to preserved sanctuary, and they will eventually graze in it. Every king has a sanctuary, and the sanctuary of Allah is what He has made haram. There lies within the body a piece of flesh (the heart). If it is sound, the whole body is sound; and if it is corrupted, the whole body is corrupted. Verily this piece is the heart."
[Bukhari & Muslim]

Yes, you quoted a translation whilst I was interpreting.

You are just giving me your own opinion. If another Muslim is asked to interpret it, his own interpretation will be different from yours.

You can't interprete the verse about killing the people of the book in that sense because other sources like the Hadith prove that's not what it means, considering the prophet lived peacefully with them and his Neighbour was a Jew. And just because they have the power and number doesn't mean they will win just like the battle of Badr proves. Again part of islams uniqueness is that we don't make up stuff, just like other religions are becoming tolerant of faggotry we can never be, we don't change our laws and that is probably why everyone hates us. Why change the laws of God because of the laws of man?

Change the laws of which God? Where you there when God was issuing the laws or are you taking what other men told you at face value? Muslims are changing their laws. The Prophet according to the Hadiths also said that the world will not end until Muslims fight the Jews. The Muslims in the middle east tried it and lost many times. If they try again they will all self destruct. Many Muslims are trying ti reinterpret that Hadith. You don't need to tolerate gays. But most of the war verses have been reinterpreted by Muslim scholars and clerics because they know that it is impossible to fight and win the non Muslims in todays world.

KellamLeTorneau:


What makes you think this is not the way it was meant to be interpreted?

Nothing. But it's not falsifiable. That is, if the moon really did generate its own light then the Quran could be interpreted in a manner which supported that as well. Just like the flat earth. If the earth really was flat and the heavens were a solid dome, the Quran has plenty of verses to back it up, yet Islamic scholars now interpret such verses to try to show that it supports the claim that the earth is round. In the past some Islamic scholars have supported the flat earth theory.

And there are many muslim scholars who think all apostates must die. That's none of my business.

And it's unfortunate that the religion has so many interpretations that Islamic scholars can find ways to support almost anything they want (just like Christians of course)

I know you have no faith, but faith in the right thing is not a bad thing, like he said in his article religion is like the human beings users manual? Which of the Qurans claims have been debunked?

For me faith is never a good thing. I can have trust in something, but that is based entirely on past evidence. Faith has no past evidence or any basis to make a trustworthy claim. I reject it 100%

dalaman:


Sure, it is a claim because neither you or me can verify it.

I can verify it, but you can't refute it.

"Neither did you (O Muhammad) read any book before it, nor did you write any book with your right [hand]. In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted Nay, it is but clear signs in the breasts of those endowed with knowledge: and none but the unjust reject Our signs."

The noble Qur'an, Al-Ankaboot(29):48-49.

In Islam? sure there is.

There is no standard way of interpreting anything,

Think of it this way. Take this an example I'm a person that goes around greeting people using a derogatory term, now when a stranger comes to town he interprets it as an insult but those who have the knowledge of who I am and how I live, will interprete it as my usual banter. So divergence comes from those with limited knowledge.

if there were there will be no divergence of opinion in the Islamic world.

And not everyone's opinion is followed. You can't follow the opinion of a mad man.

Most interpretations are done based mostly on the opinion of who ever is interpreting it.

And yes different scholars interprete differently but amongst the learned ones and most regarded ones, even if they disagree, it's of a slight margin, take the four sunni schools as an example. Almost everything is the same. But it's of different scholars.

Lets take a look at Saudi Arabia for example Scholars and Clerics in Saudi Arabi use their own personal interpretation of the Koran according to them to ban women from driving, scholars and clerics from other Arab and Islamic countries disagree with them and allow women to drive in their own countries.

Driving will soon be legalized. Women can't go out or drive according to the Saudis because of their safety, if truly this is what they fear and they believe this is the best safety they can offer, every muslim will agree with that.

Yes, but I'm sure if that person is truly a muslim his interpretation won't be so far away that you'd think we're speaking of different things, again there is a standard, and there is always a meeting point where worldwide Islamic scholars agree, a compromise.

You are just giving me your own opinion. If another Muslim is asked to interpret it, his own interpretation will be different from yours.

Change the laws of which God? Where you there when God was issuing the laws or are you taking what other men told you at face value? Muslims are changing their laws. [b]The Prophet according to the Hadiths also said that the world will not end until Muslims fight the Jews. [/b]The Muslims in the middle east tried it and lost many times. If they try again they will all self destruct. Many Muslims are trying ti reinterpret that Hadith. You don't need to tolerate gays. But most of the war verses have been reinterpreted by Muslim scholars and clerics because they know that it is impossible to fight and win the non Muslims into days world.

Please which Hadith? And no, again, things like Muhammads letter to the st Catherine's monastery and hadiths prove that islam can indeed live with people of other faith. But in our countries, it should be under our conditions.

KellamLeTorneau:


I can verify it, but you can't refute it.

"Neither did you (O Muhammad) read any book before it, nor did you write any book with your right [hand]. In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted Nay, it is but clear signs in the breasts of those endowed with knowledge: and none but the unjust reject Our signs."

The noble Qur'an, Al-Ankaboot(29):48-49.

You can't verify it, you are just repeating the claim as stated in the Koran. The Koran is just a book(religious) that some men wrote. That is all it is.

In Islam? sure there is.

There isn't. There are different schools of thoughts and movements in Islam. Sunni and Shia sects have different schools of thoughts under them.

Think of it this way. Take this an example I'm a person that goes around greeting people using a derogatory term, now when a stranger comes to town he interprets it as an insult but those who have the knowledge of who I am and how I live, will interprete it as my usual banter. So divergence comes from those with limited knowledge.

But every divergent view claims those that disagree and the ones with limited knowledge when it comes to Islam and other religions.

And not everyone's opinion is followed. You can't follow the opinion of a mad man.

There is no main and universally acceptable Islamic interpretation of the Koran. People are just left with the opinions of their clerics and scholars.

And yes different scholars interprete differently but amongst the learned ones and most regarded ones, even if they disagree, it's of a slight margin, take the four sunni schools as an example. Almost everything is the same. But it's of different scholars.

Some Whabbis are very well respected in the Islamic world, but many Muslims disagree with the Koranic interpretation of their movement same with the Salafi movement and Ahl al-Hadith movement. They all differ in their view and interpretations.

Driving will soon be legalized. Women can't go out or drive according to the Saudis because of their safety, if truly this is what they fear and they believe this is the best safety they can offer, every muslim will agree with that.

Yes, but I'm sure if that person is truly a muslim his interpretation won't be so far away that you'd think we're speaking of different things, again there is a standard, and there is always a meeting point where worldwide Islamic scholars agree, a compromise.

Really? That is not the reality we see. Some Muslims differ so much in their interpretation of the Koran and its traditions, that they sometimes fight and kill each other over it.

Please which Hadith? And no, again, things like Muhammads letter to the st Catherine's monastery and hadiths prove that islam can indeed live with people of other faith. But in our countries, it should be under our conditions.

Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates: “The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Judgment Day will not come unless Muslims fight the Jews. Muslims will defeat and kill Jews. The Jew will hide behind the stone and the tree, and the stone or tree will say: ‘Oh Muslim, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him! Only the Gharqad tree will not say because it is the tree of Jews.”

onetrack:


Nothing. But it's not falsifiable. That is, if the moon really did generate its own light then the Quran could be interpreted in a manner which supported that as well. Just like the flat earth. If the earth really was flat and the heavens were a solid dome, the Quran has plenty of verses to back it up, yet Islamic scholars now interpret such verses to try to show that it supports the claim that the earth is round. In the past some Islamic scholars have supported the flat earth theory.

Earlier Muslims did, but still some fourteenth century muslim scientist used the Quran and believed the earth was round.

Since it can be interpreted both ways like you said, then the right way is the right interpretation. More knowledge helps with better interpretation.

And it's unfortunate that the religion has so many interpretations that Islamic scholars can find ways to support almost anything they want (just like Christians of course)

On the authority of Abu 'Abdullah al-Nu'man bin Bashir (ra) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah(sas) say:

"The halal is clear and the haram is clear, and between them are matters unclear that are unknown to most people. Whoever is wary of these unclear matters has absolved his religion and honor. And whoever indulges in them has indulged in the haram. It is like a shepherd who herds his sheep too close to preserved sanctuary, and they will eventually graze in it. Every king has a sanctuary, and the sanctuary of Allah is what He has made haram. There lies within the body a piece of flesh. If it is sound, the whole body is sound; and if it is corrupted, the whole body is corrupted. Verily this piece is the heart."
[Bukhari & Muslim]

Trust me, those muslims know that they are perverting the words of God intentionally and they will surely reap what they sow. And obviously if they believe in such perversions, they can't do so without doubt, here's what the Prophet says about doubt.

“On the authority of Abu Muhammad al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Abu Taalib, the grandson of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and his beloved (may Allah be pleased with both of them), who said: I memorized from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), “Leave that which makes you doubt for that which does not make you doubt.” (Recorded in al-Tirmidhi)

For me faith is never a good thing. I can have trust in something, but that is based entirely on past evidence. Faith has no past evidence or any basis to make a trustworthy claim. I reject it 100%

Like he said, think of faith as a users manual for humans.

dalaman:


You can't verify it, you are just repeating the claim as stated in the Koran. The Koran is just a book(religious) that some men wrote. That is all it is.

No one challenged him of this claim during his time, the people who knew him acknowledge this. So it is true until proven otherwise which you can't!

There isn't. There are different schools of thoughts and movements in Islam. Sunni and Shia sects have different schools of thoughts under them.

No, Sunnis and Shias uses different sources for verification so how they interprete things cannot be the same way.



No, when there's a standard view or interpretation agreed by all muslim scholars. Whoever goes against that and claims usage of the same source is definitely lacking in knowledge. Thousands or millions of heads are better than one. It's like when someone comes and tell op you that in degrees, 1+1=686.

But every divergent view claims those that disagree and the ones with limited knowledge when it comes to Islam and other religions.

Actually there is. And whoever goes against it is questioned by other scholars. There's a limit to what's acceptable and what's not.

There is no main and universally acceptable Islamic interpretation of the Koran. People are just left with the opinions of their clerics and scholars.

If their interpretations are not accepted then they're not respected.

Some Whabbis are very well respected in the Islamic world, but many Muslims disagree with the Koranic interpretation of their movement same with the Salafi movement and Ahl al-Hadith movement. They all differ in their view and interpretations.

Really? That is not the reality we see. Some Muslims differ so much in their interpretation of the Koran and its traditions, that they sometimes fight and kill each other over it.

Example?

Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates: “The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Judgment Day will not come unless Muslims fight the Jews. Muslims will defeat and kill Jews. The Jew will hide behind the stone and the tree, and the stone or tree will say: ‘Oh Muslim, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him! Only the Gharqad tree will not say because it is the tree of Jews.”

Then it seems The end of times are coming. All the atrocities the JEWS are committing in palestine, they'll get what's coming to them. But I'm sure whatever happens, the JEWS will bring it on to their selves. Like I said, we fight for our defense, so they are probably going to do something to really puss the muslim world off.

No one challenged him of this claim during his time, the people who knew him acknowledge this. So it is true until proven otherwise which you can't!

This is actually not true. The hadiths were written about 200 years after Mohammad died. Everything we know about him was written long after he died from Islamic sources that had already dominated the Arabian peninsula. There are no writings about Mohammed from non Islamic sources during the time he was alive. All what we know about Muhammed and Islam we know it from Muslims and their biased views. You can not produce any independent writing from any Arabic non Islamic source that says anything about Mohammad when he was alive. You can only show Islamic writings about him that came very long after he died, so it is to be taken at face value. Nothing you have said is true, you are just repeating the Islamic claim.

No, Sunnis and Shias uses different sources for verification so how they interprete things cannot be the same way.

They are both Muslims aren't they?

No, when there's a standard view or interpretation agreed by all muslim scholars. Whoever goes against that and claims usage of the same source is definitely lacking in knowledge. Thousands or millions of heads are better than one. It's like when someone comes and tell op you that in degrees, 1+1=686.

There is no standard Islamic view that is why there are different schools of thought with regards to Islamic jurisprudence. If there is a standard Islamic interpretation of the Koran there will be no sects, no different Islamic movements and different schools of thoughts, their existence shows that there is no single standard of interpreting the Koran.

If their interpretations are not accepted then they're not respected.

Not respected by who? The Wahabbis for example have many followers that accept their movement and school of thought, they are dominant in Saudi Arabia, many disagree with them while many also accept their movement.

Example?

Shia vs Sunni conflict.

Then it seems The end of times are coming. All the atrocities the JEWS are committing in palestine, they'll get what's coming to them. But I'm sure whatever happens, the JEWS will bring it on to their selves. Like I said, we fight for our defense, so they are probably going to do something to really puss the muslim world off.

When it comes to Palestine, both the Jews and the Palestinians are culpable. There is nothing the Muslims in the world can do to the Jews. The entire Muslim army in the middle east have attacked them and failed. They now have nuclear weapons, even if the whole Arab armies have nuclear weapons they will only self destruct. They will just throw the weapons at each other and annihilate each other. If the Arab world gangs up against them the USA and other European powers will interfere and destroy the whole Muslim nation in the middle east. There is nothing the Islamic world can do to the Jews in reality. They can only fantasize about what is writing inside the hadith but they can never actualize it in reality.