Jump to content
270soft Forum

French Election Coverage


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, republicaninnyc said:

What source were you referring to?

The Qu'ran itself, as opposed to the commentaries and interpretive writings by the fiqhs and their scholars later down the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, Patine said:

The Qu'ran itself, as opposed to the commentaries and interpretive writings by the fiqhs and their scholars later down the line.

Please tell me where in the Quran(what verses?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, republicaninnyc said:

Please tell me where in the Quran(what verses?)

Every verse on jurisprudence of Islamic rulership and law? That's quite a large number, and I've already returned the Qu'ran I took out of the library long ago, as I'm not a Moslem, I was just studying their religion at the source scriptures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

Every verse on jurisprudence of Islamic rulership and law? That's quite a large number, and I've already returned the Qu'ran I took out of the library long ago, as I'm not a Moslem, I was just studying their religion at the source scriptures.

The ones that prove my source to be revisionist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, republicaninnyc said:

The ones that prove my source to be revisionist.

It  would take time to compile that, as, being an outside scholar and not an initiated member, I'm not familiar enough to quickly shoot them off like I can Biblical verses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

It  would take time to compile that, as, being an outside scholar and not an initiated member, I'm not familiar enough to quickly shoot them off like I can Biblical verses.

ok I'm willing to give you time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2017 at 0:42 AM, Patine said:

Forced marriage, even of children, was a common practice in virtually all cultures and nations of Antiquity and the Medieval Period, even ones in those days adhering to Judaism or Christianity. It wasn't a uniquely Moslem thing, it was a practice common across the board in those old day.

You're probably right about that. The problematic aspect is, that for Muslims Muhammed was the perfect human being. It thus halts all kinds of social progression, when living like he did, marrying a child is seen as a virtue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, koneke said:

You're probably right about that. The problematic aspect is, that for Muslims Muhammed was the perfect human being. It thus halts all kinds of social progression, when living like he did, marrying a child is seen as a virtue.

Well, Solomon, who was close to that for Jews, had over 300 wives and over 100 concubines (who we don't have enough of an accounting to say if they were all willing or of the age of modern majority, or even full puberty), and somehow they socially progressed beyond such marital and familial barbarism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Patine said:

Well, Solomon, who was close to that for Jews, had over 300 wives and over 100 concubines (who we don't have enough of an accounting to say if they were all willing or of the age of modern majority, or even full puberty), and somehow they socially progressed beyond such marital and familial barbarism.

It is not the same. Solomon was a historical figure, not a personal rolemodel for all believers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, koneke said:

It is not the same. Solomon was a historical figure, not a personal rolemodel for all believers.

To archaeologists he was a historical figure, but in Judaic (and Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Christian, as well) scriptures, he had a much more profound importance and much more idealized portrayal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Patine said:

To archaeologists he was a historical figure, but in Judaic (and Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Christian, as well) scriptures, he had a much more profound importance and much more idealized portrayal.

 

I have never heard that he had 100 wives or concubines. However the Catholic and Protestant churches and Reformed churches are strictly monogamous. The parents of Jesus were Maria and Joseph, thus a monogamous relationship. However i am sure that Jews and Ethiopian Christians aren't the kinda religious people i'd say have the best norms. They shouldn't be applauded also.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, koneke said:

 

I have never heard that he had 100 wives or concubines. However the Catholic and Protestant churches and Reformed churches are strictly monogamous. The parents of Jesus were Maria and Joseph, thus a monogamous relationship. However i am sure that Jews and Ethiopian Christians aren't the kinda religious people i'd say have the best norms. They shouldn't be applauded also.

My point in my original post about this is lost... :S

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, koneke said:

 

I have never heard that he had 100 wives or concubines. However the Catholic and Protestant churches and Reformed churches are strictly monogamous. The parents of Jesus were Maria and Joseph, thus a monogamous relationship. However i am sure that Jews and Ethiopian Christians aren't the kinda religious people i'd say have the best norms. They shouldn't be applauded also.

http://biblehub.com/1_kings/11-3.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

It says that they led him astray.

Or in a better translation:

He had 700 wives of royal birth and 300 concubines. And in fact, they did turn his heart away from the LORD.

There is no applaudation of him in this text but rather a warning that polygamy is a way to turn away men from God.

However i am not very knowledgeable in the meaning of biblical verses, but this is what i can see.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, koneke said:

It says that they led him astray.

Or in a better translation:

He had 700 wives of royal birth and 300 concubines. And in fact, they did turn his heart away from the LORD.

There is no applaudation of him in this text but rather a warning that polygamy is a way to turn away men from God.

However i am not very knowledgeable in the meaning of biblical verses, but this is what i can see.

Right, I was just outing the verse which showed that he had those many wives and concubines.  I agree that this is a warning against getting caught up in this behavior.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

Right, I was just outing the verse which showed that he had those many wives and concubines.  I agree that this is a warning against getting caught up in this behavior.

But my point was if Jews are not shackled to emulating Solomon's marital practices in the modern day, there's no reason more moderate, socially progressive, modernist Moslems (of which I've personally met quite a few who match that description, to be honest) can't move beyond Mohammed's personal family life. Also, while Mohammed did have such marital practices himself, the Qu'ran does not specifically mandate or even openly encourage a man to marry that way, not like, say, Brigham Young said that polygamy was the gateway to the highest greatness in God's Kingdom, for instance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Patine said:

But my point was if Jews are not shackled to emulating Solomon's marital practices in the modern day, there's no reason more moderate, socially progressive, modernist Moslems (of which I've personally met quite a few who match that description, to be honest) can't move beyond Mohammed's personal family life. Also, while Mohammed did have such marital practices himself, the Qu'ran does not specifically mandate or even openly encourage a man to marry that way, not like, say, Brigham Young said that polygamy was the gateway to the highest greatness in God's Kingdom, for instance.

The important thing is what the leading scholars at the Islamic University in Cairo mean. I am not aware what their opinion is about it. It will need further investigation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, koneke said:

The important thing is what the leading scholars at the Islamic University in Cairo mean. I am not aware what their opinion is about it. It will need further investigation.

A few scholars in one city's religious university is not necessarily the unified, undisputed, and undivided voice of all around 1.7 billion Moslems in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

A few scholars in one city's religious university is not necessarily the unified, undisputed, and undivided voice of all around 1.7 billion Moslems in the world.

The Cairo Islamic University is the most influential religious voice in the Muslim World.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, koneke said:

The Cairo Islamic University is the most influential religious voice in the Muslim World.

And the Vatican is the most influential religious voice, by raw numbers, in the Christian world, Neither command the unanimous, undivided, and full support of their respective global religions as a whole that they would like.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

And the Vatican is the most influential religious voice, by raw numbers, in the Christian world, Neither command the unanimous, undivided, and full support of their respective global religions as a whole that they would like.

I think you will have a hard time understanding Islam if you keep comparing it to Christianity. They're very different in nature and hierarchy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, koneke said:

I think you will have a hard time understanding Islam if you keep comparing it to Christianity. They're very different in nature and hierarchy.

Obviously, it's you who fails to understand. The "hierarchy" you speak doesn't exist in the way you may view it. The religion had already split in a permanent way in the days of the first Caliphate immediately after Mohammed's death, less than a century thereafter, when the events that led to the division of the Sunni and Shia sects, a division that has led to numerous wars, massacres, religious suppressions, and other such actions being done throughout Islamic history between Moslem communities. Also, jurisprudence and leadership are highly disputed. Islamic scholars, like all scholars, are a very proud, opinionated, divisive, and dissenting, and have argued and bickered about (and triggered wars) their disagreements. Also, no man was been recognized by even a majority of Moslems in the role of a Caliph since the Middle Ages, and the Obadhi sect of Oman and Zanzibar (which is a completely separate sect from Sunni, Shia, Sufi, and several others) has, in it's own disavowed the need or the legitimacy of a Caliph in the modern day. And there's many other examples I could give of the utter lack of unity and "hierarchy" that truly exists in modern Islam as a whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...