Australian Politics Forum

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: concubines Reply #75 - Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:28pm The eloquence of the articles confirming what I always new to be true about the message of Islamic doctrine
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49241 At my desk.	Re: concubines Reply #76 - Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:42pm How did you "always know" it to be true? You seem to be projecting an awful lot of your own knowledge onto Islam.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 96227 Gender:	Re: concubines Reply #77 - Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:53pm freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:42pm: You seem to be projecting an awful lot of your own knowledge onto Islam. Yes, FD did say this.
Back to top	IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: concubines
Reply #78 - Jun 6^th, 2014 at 10:02pm

freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:42pm:

You seem to be projecting an awful lot of your own knowledge onto Islam.

Only in so far as I refuse to accept that the message of islam is about creating bigots and misogynists. I unapologetically treat this as a priori knowledge in my islamic beliefs - it would be absolutely nonsensical to me to come into islam thinking "well it could be about tolerance and understanding, but equally it could be about bigotry". If I had accepted it was the latter, then I would not have embraced islam - unless I was a psychopath. Once I accept the overall "theme" of islam, then the rest is just details.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: concubines Reply #79 - Jun 6^th, 2014 at 10:02pm Karnal wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:53pm: freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:42pm: You seem to be projecting an awful lot of your own knowledge onto Islam. Yes, FD did say this.
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21843
A cat with a view

Re: concubines
Reply #80 - Jun 6^th, 2014 at 11:02pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 10:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:42pm:

You seem to be projecting an awful lot of your own knowledge onto Islam.

Only in so far as I refuse to accept that the message of islam is about creating bigots and misogynists. I unapologetically treat this as a priori knowledge in my islamic beliefs - it would be absolutely nonsensical to me to come into islam thinking "well it could be about tolerance and understanding, but equally it could be about bigotry".

If I had accepted it was the latter, then I would not have embraced islam - unless I was a psychopath.

So you are a convert, to ?

Quote:

Once I accept the overall "theme" of islam, then the rest is just details.

This is so interesting.

But i'm still puzzled [as i am sure that you are too] by how, so many other moslems, seem to misunderstand, 'the overall "theme" of islam'.

In that many moslems seem to think that ISLAM is all about conquest, and bringing the infidel world into subjection, under you - the moslem.

???

Quote:

Creed of the sword
Mark Durie
September 23, 2006
.....the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdel Aziz al-Sheikh, issued a statement on the official Saudi news service, defending Muslims' divine right to resort to violence: "The spread of Islam has gone through several phases, secret and then public, in Mecca and Medina. God then authorised the faithful to defend themselves and to fight against those fighting them, which amounts to a right legitimised by God. This ... is quite reasonable, and God will not hate it."
Saudi Arabia's most senior cleric also explained that war was never Islam's ancient founder, the prophet Mohammed's, first choice: "He gave three options: either accept Islam, or surrender and pay tax, and they will be allowed to remain in their land, observing their religion under the protection of Muslims." Thus, according to the Grand Mufti, the third option of violence against non-Muslims was only a last resort, if they refused to convert or surrender peacefully to the armies of Islam.
.......At the beginning, in Mohammed's Meccan period, when he was weaker and his followers few, passages of the Koran encouraged peaceful relations and avoidance of conflict: "Invite (all) to the way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious." (16:125)
Later, after persecution and emigration to Medina in the first year of the Islamic calendar, authority was given to engage in warfare for defensive purposes only: "Fight in the path of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits, for God does not love transgressors." (2:190)
As the Muslim community grew stronger and conflict with its neighbours did not abate, further revelations expanded the licence for waging war, until in Sura 9, regarded as one of the last chapters to be revealed, it is concluded that war against non-Muslims could be waged more or less at any time and in any place to extend the dominance of Islam.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20460114-601,00.html

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Mattywisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1373
Gender: male

Re: concubines
Reply #81 - Jun 6^th, 2014 at 11:08pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 10:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:42pm:

You seem to be projecting an awful lot of your own knowledge onto Islam.

Only in so far as I refuse to accept that the message of islam is about creating bigots and misogynists. I unapologetically treat this as a priori knowledge in my islamic beliefs - it would be absolutely nonsensical to me to come into islam thinking "well it could be about tolerance and understanding, but equally it could be about bigotry". If I had accepted it was the latter, then I would not have embraced islam - unless I was a psychopath. Once I accept the overall "theme" of islam, then the rest is just details.

Really, then tell me how the scriptures that the extremist muslim murderers quote do not represent the true Islam that you embrace ?

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49241 At my desk.	Re: concubines Reply #82 - Jun 7^th, 2014 at 10:22am Gandalf what scriptural support is there for a ban on sex with slaves?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: concubines Reply #83 - Jun 7^th, 2014 at 5:19pm freediver wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 10:22am: Gandalf what scriptural support is there for a ban on sex with slaves? Quran 4:25. I believe I've been through this already,
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: concubines
Reply #84 - Jun 7^th, 2014 at 5:29pm

Yadda wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 11:02pm:

But i'm still puzzled [as i am sure that you are too] by how, so many other moslems, seem to misunderstand, 'the overall "theme" of islam'.

In that many moslems seem to think that ISLAM is all about conquest, and bringing the infidel world into subjection, under you - the moslem.

Islam today is dominated by people who are in a post-colonial, anti-west state of mind. Theology and geopolitics are more intertwined than they have ever been. There is a perceived victimhood amongst muslims, especially in former colonies (which is most of the muslim world today), which gives rise to violence and irrational behaviour that is, at its core, entirely secular in nature, but have been infused with islamic ideology.

Eventually the muslim world will find their feet, and when pride and prosperity returns in the minds of the people, a more honest and objective approach to islamic doctrine will arise. IMO. Much like it was in the golden age - tolerance, coexistence and an atmosphere conjusive to free and open intellectual thought and debate.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Mattywisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1373
Gender: male

Re: concubines
Reply #85 - Jun 7^th, 2014 at 5:31pm

Sahih International: And whoever among you cannot [find] the means to marry free, believing women, then [he may marry] from those whom your right hands possess of believing slave girls. And Allah is most knowing about your faith. You [believers] are of one another. So marry them with the permission of their people and give them their due compensation according to what is acceptable. [They should be] chaste, neither [of] those who commit unlawful intercourse randomly nor those who take [secret] lovers. But once they are sheltered in marriage, if they should commit adultery, then for them is half the punishment for free [unmarried] women. This [allowance] is for him among you who fears sin, but to be patient is better for you. And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

Pickthall: And whoso is not able to afford to marry free, believing women, let them marry from the believing maids whom your right hands possess. Allah knoweth best (concerning) your faith. Ye (proceed) one from another; so wed them by permission of their folk, and give unto them their portions in kindness, they being honest, not debauched nor of loose conduct. And if when they are honourably married they commit lewdness they shall incur the half of the punishment (prescribed) for free women (in that case). This is for him among you who feareth to commit sin. But to have patience would be better for you. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Yusuf Ali: If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess: And Allah hath full knowledge about your faith. Ye are one from another: Wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable: They should be chaste, not lustful, nor taking paramours: when they are taken in wedlock, if they fall into shame, their punishment is half that for free women. This (permission) is for those among you who fear sin; but it is better for you that ye practise self-restraint. And Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Shakir: And whoever among you has not within his power ampleness of means to marry free believing women, then (he may marry) of those whom your right hands possess from among your believing maidens; and Allah knows best your faith: you are (sprung) the one from the other; so marry them with the permission of their masters, and give them their dowries justly, they being chaste, not fornicating, nor receiving paramours; and when they are taken in marriage, then if they are guilty of indecency, they shall suffer half the punishment which is (inflicted) upon free women. This is for him among you who fears falling into evil; and that you abstain is better for you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Muhammad Sarwar: If any of you do not have the means to marry a chaste believing woman, marry your believing slave-girls. God knows best about your faith. You have the same faith. Marry them with the permission of their masters and if they are chaste and have avoided fornication and amorous activities, give them their just dowries. If after marriage they commit adultery, they should receive half of the punishment of a free woman who has committed the same crime. This is for those who fear falling into evil. It is better for you to have self-control. God is All-forgiving and All-merciful.

Mohsin Khan: And whoever of you have not the means wherewith to wed free, believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess, and Allah has full knowledge about your Faith, you are one from another. Wed them with the permission of their own folk (guardians, Auliya' or masters) and give them their Mahr according to what is reasonable; they (the above said captive and slave-girls) should be chaste, not adulterous, nor taking boy-friends. And after they have been taken in wedlock, if they commit illegal sexual intercourse, their punishment is half that for free (unmarried) women. This is for him among you who is afraid of being harmed in his religion or in his body; but it is better for you that you practise selfrestraint, and Allah is OftForgiving, Most Merciful.

Arberry: Any one of you who has not the affluence to be able to marry believing freewomen in wedlock, let him take believing handmaids that your right hands own; God knows very well your faith; the one of you is as the other. So marry them, with their people's leave, and give them their wages honourably as women in wedlock, not as in licence or taking lovers. But when they are in wedlock, if they commit indecency, they shall be liable to half the chastisement of freewomen. That provision is for those of you who fear fornication; yet it is better for you to be patient. God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.

No Ban there regarding that translated..

Back to top

IP Logged

Mattywisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1373
Gender: male

Re: concubines
Reply #86 - Jun 7^th, 2014 at 5:35pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 5:29pm:

Yadda wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 11:02pm:

But i'm still puzzled [as i am sure that you are too] by how, so many other moslems, seem to misunderstand, 'the overall "theme" of islam'.

In that many moslems seem to think that ISLAM is all about conquest, and bringing the infidel world into subjection, under you - the moslem.

Islam today is dominated by people who are in a post-colonial, anti-west state of mind. Theology and geopolitics are more intertwined than they have ever been. There is a perceived victimhood amongst muslims, especially in former colonies (which is most of the muslim world today), which gives rise to violence and irrational behaviour that is, at its core, entirely secular in nature, but have been infused with islamic ideology.

Eventually the muslim world will find their feet, and when pride and prosperity returns in the minds of the people, a more honest and objective approach to islamic doctrine will arise. IMO. Much like it was in the golden age - tolerance, coexistence and an atmosphere conjusive to free and open intellectual thought and debate.

That is a nice pipe dream it is a shame the Islamic Doctrine doesn't support it. In fact according to it you wouldn't be a muslim but a non believer and we all know what it says about those now don't we.
Spin it as much as you like the quaran book is clear in what it says.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: concubines
Reply #87 - Jun 7^th, 2014 at 6:04pm

Mattywisk wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 5:31pm:

No Ban there regarding that translated..

4:25 needs clarification.

The sentence: " [They should be] chaste, neither [of] those who commit unlawful intercourse randomly nor those who take [secret] lovers." - needs to be understood properly:

As the renound islamic scholar Muhammad Asad states:

Quote:

Contrary to the popular view and the practice of many Muslims in the past centuries, neither the Quran nor the life-example of the Prophet provides any sanction for sexual intercourse without marriage…

Literally meaning, “And not taking unto themselves secret love-companions.” This passage lays down in an unequivocal manner that sexual relations with female slaves are permitted only on the basis of marriage, and that in this respect there is no difference between them and free women. Consequently, concubinage is ruled out.
- See more at: http://www.faithinallah.org/does-islam-allow-muslims-to-rape-female-sex-slaves-or-keep-unmarried-concubines/#sthash.pFvavlIb.dpuf

Thus the context of the subsequent sentence: "This [allowance] is for him among you who fears sin, but to be patient is better for you."

as well as the sahih hadith I quoted earlier:

Quote:

O young men, if you are able to support a wife then get married. Verily, it restrains the eyes and protects the private parts. Whoever is not able to do so, then he has the duty to fast because it is a means of control. - See more at: http://www.faithinallah.org/does-islam-allow-muslims-to-rape-female-sex-slaves-or-keep-unmarried-concubines/#sthash.pFvavlIb.dpuf

Clearly - muslims are encouraged to marry slaves specifically in order to avoid falling into temptation and committing sin through fornication.

Such a prescription makes absolutely no sense if muslims are given permission elsewhere to bang their slaves out of wedlock whenever they desire.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Mattywisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1373
Gender: male

Re: concubines
Reply #88 - Jun 7^th, 2014 at 6:18pm

Clearly all the other scholars and translators must all be wrong then. That makes perfect sense does it not. I am sure he is a renowned Muslim scholar no doubt.

At the end of the day in this country people are free to believe whatever scholar they like that suits their needs. I prefer to lay my money on looking at all the major translations and seeing where the majority agree unanimously than cherry pick one that just says what I want.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49241
At my desk.

Re: concubines
Reply #89 - Jun 7^th, 2014 at 6:18pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 5:19pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 10:22am:

Gandalf what scriptural support is there for a ban on sex with slaves?

Quran 4:25. I believe I've been through this already,

Is that the one that says to beat them in a respectful manner?

Quote:

Islam today is dominated by people who are in a post-colonial, anti-west state of mind. Theology and geopolitics are more intertwined than they have ever been.

More so than when Muhammed and his successors were establishing their thousand year reich?

Quote:

There is a perceived victimhood amongst muslims

Really? I hadn't noticed.

Quote:

which gives rise to violence and irrational behaviour

Is this automatic, or the particular Muslim response? Or is it automatic in the context of Islam?

Quote:

Eventually the muslim world will find their feet, and when pride and prosperity returns in the minds of the people, a more honest and objective approach to islamic doctrine will arise. IMO.

The only time Muslims have found their feet is when they were ruling everyone with an iron fist.

Quote:

Much like it was in the golden age - tolerance, coexistence and an atmosphere conjusive to free and open intellectual thought and debate.

Not according to writing from non-Muslims at the time. They made it sound just like it is today in many parts of the middle east, with Muslim mobs ready to attack anyone who said the wrong thing.

Quote:

Clearly all the other scholars and translators must all be wrong then. That makes perfect sense does it not. I am sure he is a renowned Muslim scholar no doubt.

Gandalf has an a priori translation. Then it is merely a matter of finding the Imam that got it right. Any other approach would make no sense.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jun 7^th, 2014 at 6:26pm by freediver »

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged