k4kenny:




Can be confusing for one who isn't familiar with reading the Qur'an. All are Allah. He refers to Himself in singular, plural and swears by Himself too. He also swore by Himself 3 times in surah 91( Ash Shams).He just doesn't mention His name directly like we do when we say Wallahi

Language don't work that way. You don't swear by yourself. You don't address yourself in first person singular and plural and in third person in the same sentence. It's like a statement like this; "I swear by the president of Nigeria, that I am surely able to". Can this statement be attributed to Buhari, the president?

No where does Allah swear by himself in chapter 91. I've studied the Qur'an since 2013, I do not recall Allah swearing by himself.

AbuTwins:
The Noble Quran is the eternal miracle of the Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu`alayhi wa sallam (may Allah exalt his mention) because all the miracles of the Prophets, May Allah Exalt their mention, ended with their death, except our Prophet sallallaahu`alayhi wa sallam (may Allah exalt his mention) whose miracle is still preserved. This everlasting miracle is The Book of Allah and His Revealed Speech that {Falsehood cannot approach it from before it or from behind it} [Quran 41:42]
Allah, The Almighty, Confirms this fact, when He Says (what means):
• {And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the Words of Allah.} [Quran 9:6]
• {Those who remained behind will say when you set out toward the war booty to take it, "Let us follow you." They wish to change the Words of Allah.} [Quran 48:15]

Those two verses prove that the Quran is the Words and Speech of Allah, The Almighty, that He Has Revealed to His Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam (may Allah exalt his mention). Jaabir ibn ‘Abdullaah, may Allah be pleased with him, reported that the Prophet sallallaahu`alayhi wa sallam (may Allah exalt his mention) used to invite people to Islam during the Hajj season and would say, “Who are willing to give me asylum so that I can convey the Speech of my Lord, for the Quraysh have prevented me from conveying the Speech of my Lord.” [At-Tirmithi and Ahmad]

Hence, the Quran is the Speech of Allah as unanimously agreed upon by all Muslims.
This fact is supported by several logical and tangible pieces of evidence including the following:
- The polytheists failed to produce a single verse, let alone a single Chapter, or a whole book like the Quran despite the fact that they were utterly determined and extremely motivated to oppose and falsify the call of the Prophet sallallaahu`alayhi wa sallam (may Allah exalt his mention). Furthermore, we must remember that they were the masters of the Arabic language, in which the Quran was revealed. Certainly, this constitutes a definitive proof that the Quran is the Speech of Allah, The Lord of The Worlds, not that of humans.
- The Quran foretold many matters of the unseen and made several prophecies that were all fulfilled exactly as they were foretold. For example, the Persians defeated the Byzantines in one of their battles and the Quran recorded this defeat foretelling that the Byzantines would defeat the Persians within three to nine years and this is what actually happened. Allah, The Exalted, Says (what means): {The Byzantines have been defeated * In the nearest land. But they, after their defeat, will overcome. * Within three to nine years.} [Quran 30: 2-4]
- The Quran includes many miraculous scientific facts that were only discovered fourteen centuries later. For example, the Quran told us about a barrier separating the salty water from the fresh water not to mix with each other. Allah, The Exalted, Says (what means): {He Released the two seas, meeting [side by side]; * Between them is a barrier [so] neither of them transgresses.} [Quran 55:19,20]

After about fourteen centuries, modern science confirmed this scientific fact.
- When one reads the Book of Allah, he goes into a state of peace and tranquility unlike the human speeches or writings. Allah, The Exalted, Says (what means): {Those who have believed and whose hearts are assured by the remembrance of Allah. Unquestionably, by the remembrance of Allah hearts are assured."} [Quran 13:28]
- The Quran is also a cure and it expels the devils when it is recited. Allah, The Almighty, Says (what means): {And We send down of the Quran that which is healing and mercy for the believers...} [Quran 17:82]

Of course, it is almost impossible to list all the evidences that prove that the Quran is the Speech of Allah in this article; however, we will conclude with the words of Al-Waleed ibn Al-Mugheerah, who was one of the senior leaders of the polytheists of Quraysh, about the Quran. He said, “What can I say? Whether it is about prose or poetry, or the poems of the Jinns, I possess greater knowledge than any other man. By God! The words spoken by this man cannot be compared with any of the others. By God, his words possess a charming sweetness and a particular beauty. The branches of his speech are laden with fruit while its roots are firmly entrenched in the soil from whence it proceeds. It is superior to all other discourses, and it is not possible for any other discourse to show it in poor light. For a surety it will conquer anything that comes under its own influence!” [Al-Haakim and Al-Bayhaqi]

This is the Quran, the Speech of Allah that has been challenging humankind and proving its inability to produce something to its effect as to its eloquence, wise judgments, and authentic news. The challenge is still valid, and the inability of mankind to face that challenge remains. Thus, the Quran will remain the everlasting Argument of Allah, The Almighty, against all opponents and disbelievers.
The Qur'an is learnt by heart by millions of Muslims worldwide.

Islamweb.net

What do to think of this verse;

70:40
I swear by the Lord of the two east and two west, that We are surely able to.

Who is "I", "the Lord", "We"? Who is talking in this verse?

true2god:


The Arabs maltreated black people by following the way of the prophet. The last time I checked my cousin is married to a white lady in the US and I know of many black people married to white women. I have never seen any single Yoruba-muslim man married to an Arab lady because the Arabs consider it an insult, an embarrassment and a humiliation for their daughter to marry blacks. Who are the racist here? The Arabs or the whites? You can only see black people getting married to arab women by doing an extensive google search.

I agree with everything you've said so far except this. We need to redefine racism. Racism is NOT necessarily preferring your own race or ethnicity over another. Racism is putting down another race in favor of your own race.

Now, how do you know @underlined is true for all Arabs opposed to interracial marriage? If an Arab man doesn't want you to marry his daughter, it may be because he want his grandchildren to look more like him, not because he sees it insulting, embarrassing or humiliating.

See, the drawbacks in interracial marriages are seldom considered. But they exist. Look at Europe and America today, the proportion of whites continue to fall. It is not simply because of low birth rate or immigration, the rise in interracial marriage is also a factor. People already speak of White Genocide now.

As humans we're naturally wired to populate our domain with our kinds. When there exist a factor that hinder the longevity of our race, it is only normal to be non-violently opposed to it at least.

So as a black man, why do you even care? Arabs are racist, but on this interracial marriage subject, I'm fine with them. From my experience, men of every race want their women to procreate with them, to ensure the survival of their race. It is mostly black men that see this as issue because, again from my experience, a lot of black men find black women less attractive than White, Arab, or Asian women.

NB: I do not imply interracial marriages should be banned. But people shouldn't be branded racist because they prefer individuals of their own race to marry within their race.

kazyhm:


What is surprising is agreeing to something to be nothing but the truth yet not convincing.....

That's kind of confusing...

OK, I don't know how else to clarify this. Red pill & mgtow are a mix of true and false ideas about women. Much of the individual ideas are convincing just as much are not convincing. So, as a whole, red pill and mgtow remain deeply flawed and wrong.

kazyhm:


What exactly do you stand for ?

A lot of truth doesn't convince you......what will ?

And what the disjointed crap you posted then

The truth in red pill did not convince me to embrace it because of the bias and narrow-mindedness behind it. Not to mention the psychological manipulative tactics it recommends to get women. Although, I would say I'm a bit of mgtow, since these days I mostly keep to myself.

FreeSpirited:


Any man who does not see the bright side or truism of the red pill philosophy is a coded and subtle fool. People like you learn gender dynamics the hard way. writing rubbish like a woman rapper. By the time u wake up, it will have been too late

I don't see the bright side in red pill. It is a dark side, it is biased. I've learnt a lot from the mgtow or redpill community. They speak a lot of truth, but I was never convinced. Because they are biased and want to discuss about the harms women are capable of dealing men, never about the harms men are capable of dealing women.

If all you want is attention from women, then redpill works. But it works via psychological manipulation of another human being. Too much of mind games. I'd rather invest my mind in something else.

Wow ...... I used to active here back in 2012-2016. And I've said the same as you have. I think the problem is bigger than NairaLand, it is entrenched in the culture and to an extent in our psyche. The way forward for young men is to realize that they have to improve themselves and leave the rest to fate. Even the best men out there lack in the dating department. Women may be bad, but so are men. Let the blame game stop.

Why all the earth oceans don't mix into one homogenous ocean

The nosy guy also said another thing in defense of Qur'an, "If the Qur'an is wrong about a barrier preventing the oceans from mixing, then why haven't all the oceans mixed, when will they eventually mix?"

---

Again, the waters are mixing. There is a barrier between the oceans, but water molecules are moving across this barrier. This explains the Brownian motion of fluids and the diffusion of water molecules. The two oceans are not standing side by side like 2 bricks aligned side by side.

The reason why the earth oceans like the Pacific and Atlantic ocean do not completely mix into one homogenous body is partly that the oceans continue to fill with new molecules from rain or stream. As some of the molecules mix, new molecules enter the ocean to replace them.

---

To see the problem with the Qur'an on this matter, it is essential to understand the cause of ocean salinity, understand fluid properties and dynamics.

At the time of Muhammad people didn't understand these things. They macroscopically saw the two waters divided by a barrier, and ignorantly thought the two were not mixing.

Israeli Jews and their Western Backers are NOT Gog & Magog

I don't know what that nosy guy meant by 'the Jews are back to reclaim their holy land(Israel) with the help of Gog and Magog'.

---

First, I have read all the tafsir and none of them specifically mentioned Jewish return to Jerusalem or Palestine with regards to Gog and Magog. This is contrary to the nosy guy's assertions.

Second, the westerners that helped Jews occupy Palestine did not come to Palestine by trespassing any WALL. They did not swoop down from any mountain slope as the Qur'an imply.

Third, these westerners are mostly European Christians, people of the Book, who have been in contact with the Muslim world for centuries before the State of Israel. Gog and Magog should have no such contact with the Muslim world because they were supposed be trapped behind the WALL.

Fourth, the drying of sea of Galilee is not tenable proof that Israeli Jews and their European allies are Gog & Magog. The hadith states that Gog and Magog will drink all of the water, on their way past the sea. This sound different from settling by the sea for decades and drinking all of its water as Israelis have done.

Fifth, there are hadith that also state that Jesus will appear before Gog & Magog comes. This is contradictory to the presence of Gog and Magog at this point because Jesus is not here yet, at least according to traditional Muslims.

---

You can see that the nosy guy don't research one bit. He copies and paste work of other writers without proper inquiry. He promote baseless and toxic ideas that only cultivate hatred among men.

yemmie:
Ideally, I don’t get involved with such discussions.

At op, please kindly answer the questions below

1: Where exactly is your soul in your body
2: Why do plant breath out oxygen and breath in CO2.
3: Kindly explain how the brain understands and comprehend things.

Thank you

1. I don't know. You want to tell me what a soul is? Have you seen, felt or heard one?

2. How is this relevant to the topic? How are your three questions relevant to the topic?

3. I don't know more than science currently reveal. It is a long story, that can't be explained in a few words.

You ask me question as if I come here promoting atheism. This thread is about contradictions between Qur'an & Science. Kindly stick to the topic.

Am I Still A Muslim?

One of the expectation from the Muslim community when a Muslim express concern on flaws in the Qur'an, is for the Muslim to publish their personal account; "My Journey from Islam to Atheism" or "Seeking Allah & Finding Jesus".

I have nothing to reveal other than I do not regard Qur'an as certainly the divine, preserved word of God. I think we should look at the Qur'an as professionals look at their profession. If we find an idea in the Qur'an that is flawed or at least capable of impacting erroneous knowledge, we should state it.

This idea that "I'm a Muslim so I must always defend the Qur'an", don't cut it anymore. We have seen from tafsir how the earlier Muslims were misled on science because they were just too sure that the Qur'an is divine and perfect and man is unworthy of questioning its ideas.

Peace.

I have been Honest & Transparent

There have been false allegations against me, that I've been a phony all along, and that my recent critique of the Qur'an just proves this.

This is untrue. I've always believed the Qur'an to be perfect and divine since day one. I started on Islam section as a sunnite and I'm sure that people like tbaba or deolz are witness. I continued to study the Qur'an in order to practice it and to clear it of all the wrongs that I felt Muslims & non-Muslims attributed to it.

So, all my years criticizing "traditional Islam" or Muslims texts, I've never been skeptical of the Qur'an until late last year to early this year. The moment I became certain of the "weakness" in some of the verses, I began to echo my skepticism, though not as vivid as I did here. Therefore I have nothing to hide.

See full post here - https://www.nairaland.com/5267131/quran-science-15-contradictions

Why I created this post

In short, Muslim Fanaticism. I’ve detested nothing in the Muslim community than Fanaticism, the product of ignorance mixed with religious zeal. This detest only intensified when I realized that while there are erroneous ideas imparted by Qur’an, there are Muslims who seek to enforce the same Qur’an as if it is the panacea for every disease - Muslims refusing gay marriage, supporting amputating thieves, or supporting husbands hitting their misbehaving wives, and threatening those who disbelieve in Qur’an with hell.

Look, people need to be informed, urgently. Most Muslims don’t read the Qur’an. The few that read it basically sing it in a language they don’t understand. And those that read translation or understand Arabic either never examined the verses pertaining to science or are not scientifically enlightened enough to see the errors behind these verses. These verses raise legitimate concern about the Qur’an, and it would not be just to remain silent about them.

The Price for creating this post

If you’ve been reading the replies to my posts here or on other threads, you can note they are not any kind. Also, by creating this post, I’ve let down many who aligned with most of my views on Qur’an, Hadith & Islam. But what can I do?

When I found these contradictions, I planned to slip off Nairaland Islam section, permanently. I feel discouraged that the book I’ve spent so much to understand, practice and endorse may not be the divine literary, infallible perfection I’ve been led to believe. But since I was in the middle of my threads on Monotheism and Human Rights, and had planned future threads on sharia, hijab propaganda, Polygamy; I decide to delay my withdrawal till I’ve completed my threads.

Empyree's History of Ignorance

He believes the sun goes somewhere at sunset
He asks; "Before the sun rises everywhere, where is it?"
https://www.nairaland.com/4594366/why-quran-alone-2.0/1#70540224

---

He believes menses is a means of eliminating illness from the body.
https://www.nairaland.com/5211738/philosophical-questions-where-did-theism#78806026

These were antiquated beliefs of men before menstruation was fully understood. It is surprising that Empyree continues to bear them, despite the power of the internet.

---

He believes God gave the earliest men clothes.

The earliest men didn't get any cloth. If they wanted clothes, raw animal skin, they'd risk their lives in the wilderness hunting for games with very crude and inefficient stick and stone tools. Giving the hardship they'd have to undergo to get such clothes, those cannot be given to them by God as Abrahamic scriptures reveals.

---

He believes Nudity causes Immorality

Nudity don't cause immorality, it is how the society choose to perceive nudity that causes immorality. In parts of the Muslim world women with abaya have reported sexual harassment. Even at Hajj, in the sacred masjid, women have reported being intentionally groped by men.

---

Indigenous tribes live mostly nude without their society ravaged by debauchery.

Health experts deal with varying degrees of nudity of patient in examination and treatment. If nudity causes immorality, all the years of practice would have corrupted their hearts.

I have a certificate in Basic Life Support. If a woman collapse from cardiac arrest in public, I'm tasked and qualified to resuscitate her. I have to feel her carotid pulse, this requires moving or loosening her headscarf. I'll have to signal for emergency medical team.

I'll have to initiate chest compression, this require putting my hand on her chest between her breast and compressing it. When the team arrives, they'll have to attach defibrillator on her bare chest, this will require unbuttoning or pulling open her shirt or blouse.

If nudity create immorality, then my mind would be really corrupted from assisting this woman, I'll not want to help another woman with cardiac arrest ever again.

---

In the Muslim world, women would rather not see a doctor than see a male doctor for examination. Female doctors that refuse to examine male patients have been reported.

In the Muslim world, if a Muslim woman trip in public, it is better for her to fall and hurt her foot than for her headscarf/hijab to slip off. These backward, antiquated and flawed mentality defines Empyree or najib and many other Muslims in Islam section.

---

I'll wrap this thread up with one last word; No holy book or religion is bigger than the world. Go out to the real world and enlighten yourself.

More On Empyree's dark side

After dealing with his opponents like me or tru2god in this section, Empyree would go deal with more opponents like Christians in Religion section. He'd sometimes squabble with them, psychologically manipulate them with taunts and trolls and guilt tripping.

In all my years of engaging Empyree, I never knew him to be good in Qur'an or Hadith or Fiqh. He basically copies and paste fatwas and regurgitate the same lines from Muslim speakers. But I have learnt many Muslim conspiracy and convert stories from him.

He has this phone and computer in his room, with social media or mass media screenshots and YouTube urls on these stories, and he'd upload them and post them unnecessarily, not to inform, but to add firepower to his psychological manipulation.

He is very superstitious, with little knowledge or appreciation of science. So, he often leaves scientifically wrong statements in his bid to defend Islam. I have collected just a few of them here;

Another look at Empyree's psychological manipulation

In this thread I'm commenting, Empyree again fights with tru2god. Somehow, tru2god's dabbling in the dirty secrets of Muslim history provoked him. He begins to berate and censure the tru2god, as usual with taunts. His paranoia so evident, as he assumes tru2god's intent in this is nefarious. And it got so ridiculous that Albaqr had to call him out on it; https://www.nairaland.com/4998545/marieh-carey-performed-live-saudi/3#75630940

tru2god:

The sahabas never made any mistake bro. Stop covering evil out of religious conviction. Their action was pre-meditated and worthy of condemnation. How can you, without iota of conscience, develop a very strong sense of hatred against the family of your prophet which eventaully resulted into the death of his entire family? And for the records, the actions of Abu Bakr, Umar Ibn Kathab and Uthman ibn Affan (the first three righty guided khalifa) technically eliminated the entire household of the prophet, the event which resulted into the current ideological difference between the shia and the sunnis. Any moral soul should be reasonable in condemnation their 'game of throne' among the muslim ummah.

This history is never taught in any mainstream Muslim school. How can you avoid the mistake of the past when you don't want to learn form history? How can genuine healing be possible without reconciling the mistake of the past and teach the future generation to live in harmony and to avoid the same mistakes again?

Empyree:

Don't think one bit that I'm here to entertain you. You being a confused Christian, how does this concern you?. I am well aware of Christian tactics long enough.

Albaqr:

Brother, the guy stated facts. Forget about whatever antics he might play. Today, people have access to information than you can ever think. Let's stop denying facts. We will look insincere.

Empyree's insensitivity to his psychological manipulation

Empyree:

He doesn't realize I was just pulling his leg.

No, man. No. He was not pulling my leg. He was being a jerk, wasting my time, and decide to frustrate, intimidate and guilt trip me after I pointed out most Muslims would not approve religious police pestering them for salat. I didn't understand him better then, so I fell for his psychological manipulation, and left posts that I shouldn't have.

Afterwards, I think I apologized & explained I could no longer engage with him on NairaLand again. And I stopped replying or reading his posts for several months. But this man won't leave me. He continued to haunt me on my threads, leaving ignorant or nasty comments, fighting with posters that agree with me.

He would troll and taunt me, call me hypocrite or ex-Muslim for identifying as a Muslim but critiquing Qur'an verses. And he'd remind me how much I owed him for his posting on my thread because no one else posts on my threads. All these behaviors are similar to those seen in personality disorders I've mentioned above.

Empyree can't understand Qur'an & Human Liberty

Albaqr:

Fourth, "la Ikraha fi din". There is a type of "la" in Nawh (Arabic syntax and grammar) called "lam nafiyatul jins". This "lam of negation" does not spare ANYTHING. It is the same "la" used in "la ilaha ilah Allah". It negate EVERYTHING except Allah. Likewise, in "la ikraha fi din", it negate EVERY ACT OF FORCEFUL ACTION in practising religion. Besides, "ad-din" used in the ayat comprises ALL din. Islam inclusive. Therefore, if a Muslim decides not to pray or pay zakat or fast or go to hajj (despite meeting all conditions), you can only persuade and persuade NOT killing.

Empyree:


Let's not get something wrong here. "La ikraha fi Deen" as I said earlier doesn't apply to muslims in the sense that a Muslim already entered into the religion. He or she can not use this Ayah to support his it her position to evade salat, zakat, Ramadan and Hajj. At the same time it doesn't mean killing them because they do not observe these, no. This is what usermane think, that I support forcing or killing anyone who doesn't pray.

No, of course I knew he was against killing Muslims for not doing salat or zakat. But I find it upsetting that you deny killing is the legal penalty in sharia, and you think it is still OK to harrass and drag grown men to salat. I did my best to pinpoint the loopholes in your philosophy long ago on my thread on Human rights.

Is Empyree lying about sharia or ignorant?

Albaqr:
# Lastly on this: Point of consideration: Have you ever read various differing accounts as per why those Muslims led by a Sahabi refused to pay zakat to Abubakar, the new caliph? Here you are judging them in order to protect the caliph's action.

Empyree:

There are issue around Abu Bakr's judgement and there are different reports with some similarities.

After nabi's demise (saw), it is true that some muslims apostatized. Some simply refused to pay zakat not necessarily because they would not give allegiance to the new govt of Abu Bakr, they simply withheld their taxes, perhaps, "pending" their "observation and decision" on the new govt. Some also did not pay zakat due to misunderstanding of the Qur'anic text in question. These set of people which included Malik ibn Nuweira were recognized to be muslims by Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr (ra) would not kill them simply for withholding zakat. These people did not reject zakat tenet in itself. Where problems lie are the historical records.

Some said Abu Bakr killed them because they became apostates. This is too vague because Abu Bakr considered these people to be muslims. Matter of fact, there were physical evidences that they were indeed Muslims when Abu Bakr heard they withheld tax.

Haven't I gone through this already? By refusal to pay zakat, they automatically become apostates. In traditional Islam, you don't need to say, "I'm no more a Muslim" to become apostate. Just refusing salat and zakat permanently give you away as an apostate, even if you continue to practice other things in Islam.

All the Imams of fiqh agreed that any Muslim who deliberately neglect salat and zakat for more than 3 days is an apostate and sentenced to death. The fiqh is important in traditional Islam as it guides later Muslim generation to imitate the earliest generations. The earliest generations are describes as the best generation of Muslims.

Why do Muslims cherry pick sharia?

tru2god:

The issue relating to how Abu Bakr treated apostates, and zakat offenders, is important because it is a prelude to any Islamic ruling in many part of the Muslim world on zakat-related matters. For the fact that you are not in a sharia-complaint country does not mean that it must not be discussed. If, for whatever reason, you don't want it discussed 'no wahala'. You should also understand that the ulamas, in many countries,
has issued various fatwas based on the recorded actions of the sahabas, and not the prophet himself.

Empyree:


your antics will not work with me obviously. Take Iran and Saudi for instance, do you have proof that they kill Muslims because they evade or deny zakat?. Onus is on you to prove this. You need to understand there are other sohaba with different rulings after Abu Bakr (ra). So Muslim countries may choose whichever is in their best interest. However, do they even take zakat collection serious anymore?. I'm sure no.

It is because they realized how stupid those aspect of sharia is. It is the same reason why they no longer charge jizya. Muslims realize deep down that sharia is a flawed system, but they lack the gut to openly say this. Hence they resort to very lazy excuse for not following sharia laws, such as;

"No, that's not sharia law, sharia is 5 pillars, love your neighbor, good hygiene, respect for elders"
"No, Qur'an didn't say we should kill apostates"
"But the prophet never beat his wife"

Justifying killing zakat defaulters with moral relativism

Empyree:

You are comparing those days to this modern time?. Even at that, so called civilization kill people like chicken. Go to fb and you will see south americans the way they kill for fun. Those days, they may kill for "silly things". Today, those "silly things" are punishable by fines. So you dont blame them. Those days a king would simply killed for being mocked at by ordering head of someone. Today, they still do it by sanctions which kill innocent civilians. But for me, i do not distinguish modern civilization from ancient times in this situation.

Do yourself a favor by studying sharia from the classical tafsirs, hadith and fiqh. Reduce listening to modern apologists like Mufti Menk or Nouman Ali Khan, or even Yasir Qadhir. What Abu Bakr did to those who didn't pay zakat is not just the way people in those days are handled for not paying tax. It is the way of sharia.

Sharia is not human ethics that modifies with time. It is perfect, final, divine law immutable at all times.

Equating fighting and killing zakat defaulters to arresting and prosecuting tax defaulters

And if you are not citizen but green card holder, and you do not pay tax, forget about getting citizenship. You may even be deported for that.

So you can see how importance of zakat is. Do you blame US?. Absolutely not because these taxes they collected go a long way. This is why the country is what it is. From these taxes they are able to fund elderly and disabled, retirement funds, all types of social benefits, roads, electric, water and sewer and the list is very long.

This is what zakat also do. So if US does not take tax lightly, why would Abu take those people lightly?. Abu Bakr waged war on apostates at that time is tantamount to US govt jailing or deporting people because of tax.

The only difference is one has religious connotation the other is seen from another perspective but they both shared same goal.

Hmmm...? What is this? So much difference exist between the two. I tackled the differences - What is so WRONG in enforcing Zakat.

If I live under sharia and they come to collect my zakat, I can tell them that I'm not paying to them.
If they insist, I can tell them to "F' off", and that "I'm no longer a Muslim, and don't have to pay zakat". I continue to secretly practice Islam, pay my zakat directly to the poor by myself when ever I'm ready. Nowadays, nobody would border me. Of course, if I lived in the time of Abu Bakr, I'd be sentenced to death.

People become Muslims on their own. They don't owe anyone zakat but God. If the state is concerned about the poor, let the state decree a non-religious tax or reserve some fraction of the annual budget for the poor.

Flawed Analogy between Enforced Zakat and Enforced Tax

Empyree: His approach emphasized importance of zakat. But today many don't take zakah serious until they enter their graves. I have equated zakat with modern Western civilization tax system.

Again, I've exposed the loopholes in this. There is so much difference between zakat and modern taxation.

The damage control for Caliph Abu Bakr continues

Empyree:

But we know zakah is only paid by those who are well enough. Abu Bakr did the right thing by enforcing payment on them. We all know the benefit of zakat. Look at Nigeria environment today. If govt is firm and upright, they would enforced zakah on these rich people and looters. Rather, they are permanently rich and poor are permanently poor. This is why zakah was established (to spread wealth). It is not all about killing those who refused to pay zakah. Abu Bakr (ra)'s decision was based on ijma at that time even though some top sahaba frown at outstart.

His decision was not based on ijma. Just his deduction from the hadith;

"The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify to La ilaha ill-allah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah) and that I am the Messenger of Allah, and establish regular prayers and pay Zakat.'"

Does Empyree even believe his own words? Abu Bakr was determined to fight them regardless of what any one thought.

Poor understanding of the term "Islamic/Muslim terrorist"

Empyree:

"strange & funny"? cheesy but "Islamic terrorists" is relative and not oxymoron?. Media is fantastic. They successfully brainwashed you people to believe that every slight misdeed of muslims is act of terrorism.

Forget the media. Not every slight misdeed done by Muslims is Muslim terrorism, but every misdeed Muslim commits and justify in the name of Islam, or Qur'an. If Boko Haram, ISIS, Al Qaeda carried out their terror without invoking Islam; shouting takbir and reciting shahada or quoting Qur'an, we can all agree not to call them Islamic terrorists.

The New Zealand shooter did not quote Bible or shout 'Haleluya', 'In Jesus name' or 'Jehovah'. So he's not a Christian terrorist. Charlie Hebdo shooters on the other hand not only killed in the name of Islam, but they kept on shouting 'ya rasoolulah' and 'Allahu Akbar'. No one should have to schooled on this. Think.

Fallacy of Whataboutism

Empyree:

Need I say more?. You summed it all by acknowledging facts but spoiled it by adding "so called"to suggest they are not necessarily CHRISTIANs. Anyways you agree that Jews and Christian terrorists are greatest threats to humanity right now.

Even though you decided to bring about way against apostates by Abu Bakr (ra), I can also go back to history. Before prophet muhammad (saw), didn't Jews and CHRISTIANS at war as well?. How about Roman army that invaded Jerusalem and destroyed it?. And other countless wars like that before the advent of Nabi Muhammad, were they muslims?

Oh, look! Fallacy of Whataboutism. Also known as Tu quoque fallacy. "I know Muslims attacked apostates but what about Jews & Christians ............"

najib632:
Please enjoy every moment of your delusional glory, whether you like it or not you will die and that will be Allah's time.

There is no glory in any of this. I'm actually disappointed. First, I thought the problems only lay with hadith. And now I come to find that Qur'an has it own fair share of issues. I did my best to address these issues objectively, but in the end, there are just those verses breeding doubts on the Qur'an. Here is one again;

22:63 - Do you not see that Allah send down from the sky water.

22:65 - And He withholds the sky lest it falls upon the earth except by His leave.

Now, the sky is where the rain comes from - this is the troposphere. The troposphere is space, with gas and dust particles. As such it is not conceivable for the troposphere be to fall upon the earth. Thus, no need to withold it.

22:65 would only make sense if the sky or troposphere is a solid ceiling like mass. This is not the case. So, this verse is apparently wrong.

The way forward is not by cursing people and intimidating them for criticizing or disobeying Qur'an. The way forward is to be humble and realize there is at least a chance the Qur'an is not God's word, whether you continue to practice Islam or not.

JeromeBlack:



Abeg. Brother Hijab is trying. Compared to the other Muslim dawah clowns, he is more sensible.

Of course I don't agree with him but he is trying.

If you say so, I guess I'll let you be. But it highlight the society's lower expectation for Muslims on philosophy. To me, the true Muslim philosophers don't waste time debating existence of God, they see that this debate on an even playing field can never have a decisive victor.

Where the true Muslim philosophers occupy themselves is in the purging Islam of the fanatic thoughts and ideas Muslims inherited from their predecessors.

The likes of Tarek Fatah, Maajid Nawaz, Imam Tawhidi, Mufti Abu Layth al Maliki or Zuhdi Jasser. These are recommendable Muslims. Not someone like Hijab who can't get beyond archaic mentality like "the unbelievers are the enemies".

Sino, where are you? Here is another verse on earth that raises more doubt on the Qur'an authenticity.

79:27 - 30: - Are you a more difficult creation or the heaven? He raised its ceiling and proportioned it. And he darkened its night and brought out its morning/brightness. And the earth after that He spread it?

"He darkened its night". "It" here refers to the heaven - sky.

Now, there is no night or day for the heaven, the space above the earth. The heaven is not an opaque solid receiving sunlight. Night is a phenomenon only applicable to the earth because of the earth opacity and rotation.

Also, what is meant by "darkened its night"? Sound like the night was clear or bright, then it was darkened. I can't make sense of it.

Plus, what is meant by "brought out its morning/brightness"?