[Indo-Chinese Food]

(Original post by Perseveranze)
The part you're having trouble understanding is that Hafsah was alive during Uthman(ra) standardizing the Qur'an, in fact she let him use that original to create the standardized version, which she herself approved of.

The only reason did the later Caliph destroy the original is in case anyone got a hold of this original, and tried to alter it or somehow use it with intent on causing problems amongst the community;

"'I only did this because I feared that after the passing of time, some doubter might foster doubt with regard to those folios.'" - Marwan b. Hakam - http://www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/fiqha_e27.html - [GF Haddad, Hafsa's Qur'an Folios]

Of course, no one would actually be able to alter the Qur'an (even if it was an original) as it immediately have been found out;

"[i]f any great changes by way of addition, suppression or alteration had been made, controversy would almost certainly have arisen; but of that there is little trace." - Bell's introduction to the Qurʼān By Richard Bell, William Montgomery Watt, p. 51:

But Marwan wanted only the standardized version (Uthman's) to remain, allowing the Muslims to be united on one Ahruf, which was based on the dialect of the Prophet(pbuh)'s mother toungue.



It is illogical to say "they were different" when the Original was used by Uthman(ra) under Hafsa's permission and acceptance.

Thereupon, on the Caliph's order, the mushaf was taken from Hafsah for transcription, and from it Zayd ibn Thabit (who was the main scribe) prepared several copies with the help of 'Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr, 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Hisham (both members of the original committee that compiled the Qur'an) and Said ibn al-'As. While the original was returned to Hafsah, one of the copies was kept with the Caliph at Madinah and the rest were sent to major Islamic cities. [14]

Furthermore, everyone at that time agreed for Marwan to destroy it, so there's only Uthman's Standardized version, had they not agreed, then there would have been a revolt, which there was not. Marwan was fearful of future disagreements. This implies that there were no disagreements during his time.

You seem to be trying to convicne me with your own opinion instead of evidecne or logic - You are telling me what Uthmans intentions were, but you dont know what his genuine intentions were. HE was not mohammed or a prohet, simply a man following his own agenda, yet he alterd the whole course fo islamic hsitroy and practice.
You say Hafash didnt object to her codex being detroyed, but isalmic record states clealry she refused to give up her copy for destruction and the caliphs wiated for her death before doing so. Same records also state that those original followers that uthman demanded to give up their versins of the quran for the complilation of his own version were against the idea also. MAny orignal authors of the qurans, it is told to us by the caliphs and their biographers, were "killed in battle" Could they not have been killed by uthman instead - to make sure there was no challenge to his version. I mean why would you logically send the handful of men that had been dictated mohammeds quran directly, to war, to risk being killed? Seems strange no?
Unless of course you were trying to wipe out all the alternative versions of the quran so your own one was only to remain. Then you could claim (as cailph) you eradicated the entire history and traceable record of mohammeds original words - for the purpose of "standardisation" and no-one is left to prove you wrong

[Ms.LastMinute.com]

(Original post by Hypocrism)
Yea, that's ****ing funny, you massive joker.

i'm sick


you hippocrite
u hate us muslims, and yet u dissing me for apparently hating on nonmuslims..

[Hypocrism]

(Original post by y.yousef)
i'm sick


you hippocrite
u hate us muslims, and yet u dissing me for apparently hating on nonmuslims..

lolwhat. What makes you think I hate muslims?

[Ms.LastMinute.com]

(Original post by Hypocrism)
lolwhat. What makes you think I hate muslims?

Well you try finding anyfin to refute us init.
When there are more worser people in the world. lol

plus u talk to me in that sarcastic tone all the time, that kinda pisses me off, i'll be honest.

[Hypocrism]

(Original post by y.yousef)
Well you try finding anyfin to refute us init.
When there are more worser people in the world. lol

plus u talk to me in that sarcastic tone all the time, that kinda pisses me off, i'll be honest.

This is how I write, so, sorry about it.

I haven't even referenced muslims in this thread, and treat all religions with equal cynicism. If I appear to target Islam, it's because Islam and Christianity are the most common themes on TSR, and I normally have something to say about threads in the religion section.

I happen to have been placed into religion as a child, and as such my only real problem with religions is that parents pass down their religion unfairly, when the child should be given the opportunity to choose their beliefs for themselves. I happened to realise I was being lied to in my Anglican school - others are not so lucky. In fact, in Islam I think you know that it is heresy to force your children into your beliefs-"Let there be no compulsion in religion." If we really thought about it this would mean that parents cannot insist their children follow their religion. As an extrapolation, if studies showed that parents who initiate their children at a young age give them a higher rate of continuing belief in adulthood than the belief rate in non-childhood-initiated households, it should be against Islam to call your child a Muslim or involve them in religion until they are of the age to choose, otherwise it may be interpreted as making them become members of your religion and disobeying your own laws. I don't see Muslims agreeing with this, but rant saved until another time.

[Ms.LastMinute.com]

(Original post by Hypocrism)
This is how I write, so, sorry about it.

I haven't even referenced muslims in this thread, and treat all religions with equal cynicism. If I appear to target Islam, it's because Islam and Christianity are the most common themes on TSR, and I normally have something to say about threads in the religion section.

I happen to have been placed into religion as a child, and as such my only real problem with religions is that parents pass down their religion unfairly, when the child should be given the opportunity to choose their beliefs for themselves. I happened to realise I was being lied to in my Anglican school - others are not so lucky. In fact, in Islam I think you know that it is heresy to force your children into your beliefs-"Let there be no compulsion in religion." If we really thought about it this would mean that parents cannot insist their children follow their religion. As an extrapolation, if studies showed that parents who initiate their children at a young age give them a higher rate of continuing belief in adulthood than the belief rate in non-childhood-initiated households, it should be against Islam to call your child a Muslim or involve them in religion until they are of the age to choose, otherwise it may be interpreted as making them become members of your religion and disobeying your own laws. I don't see Muslims agreeing with this, but rant saved until another time.

Lol chill, it’s all cool bro.

‘AND christianity’. I’d say Islam makes up the majority of the ‘conflict’ threads, not Christianity lol
Yeah sure mate, you can put forward your opinion. But remember there’s certain ways to portray your arguments without offending anyone.

Hmmmm ...
Well...religion is like a set of morals.
So pretend ‘culture-wise’ your parents make you wear oriental clothes from young.
You can’t be like a bitter teen when your older and say ‘’’omg i can’t believe they forced me to wear this, where was my free will gone?! Where is the bloody DEMOCRACCYYYY ’’’
Because at these ages, you are too young to make a proper decision, even at teens.
So in your parents point of view, they’re only doing what they think at the time is right for you.
If they believe that, obviously they’ll want to bring you up with the morals they believe in as well.

Well ofcourse being born into a muslim family, makes it easier for someone to become muslims, compared to someone who wasn’t born into a muslim family. But also acknowledge that, the muslim later on have their own decisions to make, such as which sect they may want to follow when they’re older.

With my parents, what they did was...teach my all the Islamic stuff like full on when I was younger. But now, they’ve just left me to it. They don’t ‘force’ me to read my prayers etc. That’s MY choice.
Nor have they ‘forced’ me to wear a scarf, i’m 18 now, and I still haven’t worn one.
And as a Christian or muslim, that is their only duty, they should tell you, and then it’s your choice.

What do you mean you were ‘lied’ in your Anglican school?

[desijut]

I would say the Guru Granth Sahib can be taken seriously. Only 10 people (gurus) influenced it, it was only finished in the late 1600s/early 1700s and hasnt changed at all since then. Some of the theories in it are amazing and do not diagree with scientific theory. I can go on but cba...

[Hypocrism]

(Original post by y.yousef)
‘AND christianity’. I’d say Islam makes up the majority of the ‘conflict’ threads, not Christianity lol

You clearly haven't been following my heavy contribution to ChristianLady's threads! xD

(Original post by y.yousef)
Because at these ages, you are too young to make a proper decision, even at teens.

That's exactly my point! Children are not able to make an informed choice about religion, because they are highly susceptible to adult opinions, and they're only being exposed to their parents' culture of religion, making it a given they are going to follow the religion they are pressured into. Which in Islam is against doctrine as you're effectively using compulsion in religion. The same applies to Islam parents who threaten their children to follow the religion under pain of being disowned at 16. (Not to pick on Islam, I've just seen threads on here with Muslim individuals complaining of such an occurrence. I'm sure the same is true of other beliefs too.)

(Original post by y.yousef)
With my parents, what they did was...teach my all the Islamic stuff like full on when I was younger. But now, they’ve just left me to it. They don’t ‘force’ me to read my prayers etc. That’s MY choice.

It wasn't your choice to believe in the religion. It was your parents who forced you into it, and to me that's unacceptable and immoral. Sorry, this is my opinion on introducing children to your own religion, it's akin to using physical force because of the susceptibility of the young mind to adult words. They never even give their children a chance to think for themselves, and I've seen the results

(Original post by y.yousef)
What do you mean you were ‘lied’ in your Anglican school?

Lied to about religion, as in, they said "religion is true".

[WizzleKidd]

(Original post by navarre)
There are actually Christians who believe the KJV Bible to be the very word of God, passed on to mankind and written by God.

It's absurd. There are good passages and some wisdom to have in every religious text, but I can't understand basing an entire life around a centuries old book with so many contradictions, inaccuracies and with little relevance to the modern age.

Lol you cannot say such a thing about the bible if you have not read it. Everything you said was wrong.

[aljolson]

(Original post by .eXe)
Whats wrong with them being modified? Humans arent perfect, translations can go wrong and may later need to be corrected. Whats the big issue?

As the bible stands currently, whats the problem with it? Is there something wrong with forgiveness of sin? Does turning your other cheek sound immoral? Is loving your enemy a bad thing?

If anything my question is why shouldnt the bible be followed? Its not as if it teaches us to be criminals, immoral or evil. Quite the opposite infact.


Posted via TSR iPhone App

have you read the bible? especially the old testament, it is full of awful deeds, rather than the word of god, it is more like the word of the devil. The bible is NOT a good book of teaching morality and kindness to ones fellow man, it is coursed with hatred, even Jesus (did he ever exist?) accepted the idea of slavery. I say pooh to the bible one may aswell take the tory manifesto as the word of god.

[Sean9001]

As a piece of literature, absolutely. The bible is without doubt the most important text in the world, and everyone should read it. An atheist who hasn't read it is verging on barbary.

As a 'moral guide', or code of conduct, absolutely not.

[desijut]

Just because know there's all sorts of barbaric stuff in the Bible and Koran, doesnt mean it's in other holy scriptures

(Original post by Hypocrism)
You clearly haven't been following my heavy contribution to ChristianLady's threads! xD



That's exactly my point! Children are not able to make an informed choice about religion, because they are highly susceptible to adult opinions, and they're only being exposed to their parents' culture of religion, making it a given they are going to follow the religion they are pressured into. Which in Islam is against doctrine as you're effectively using compulsion in religion. The same applies to Islam parents who threaten their children to follow the religion under pain of being disowned at 16. (Not to pick on Islam, I've just seen threads on here with Muslim individuals complaining of such an occurrence. I'm sure the same is true of other beliefs too.)



It wasn't your choice to believe in the religion. It was your parents who forced you into it, and to me that's unacceptable and immoral. Sorry, this is my opinion on introducing children to your own religion, it's akin to using physical force because of the susceptibility of the young mind to adult words. They never even give their children a chance to think for themselves, and I've seen the results



Lied to about religion, as in, they said "religion is true".

Just because you're informed about a religion when you're young doesnt mean you will follow it when you're older. And just because in your mind religion is fake, doesnt make it fake. And same goes for the if you think it's true. However i believe it is true about God, etc. But I dont force my opinons onto people, which is what you're doing

[Inverse]

No, it should not be taken seriously; it should be completely disregarded for the illogical rubbish it is.

[Blackburn_Allen]

If you want to be a misogynistic, homophobic, genital mutilating supporter of genocide then, yes, take it seriously.

If, however, you want to lead a moral and meaningful life then no, don't take it seriously whatsoever.

[tif49]

(Original post by Inverse)
No, it should not be taken seriously; it should be completely disregarded for the illogical rubbish it is.

(Original post by Blackburn_Allen)
If you want to be a misogynistic, homophobic, genital mutilating supporter of genocide then, yes, take it seriously.

If, however, you want to lead a moral and meaningful life then no, don't take it seriously whatsoever.

Firstly, what illogical rubbish?

Secondly yes the Bible may have been interpolated and unreliable but the Qur'an is complete and intact and contains no such 'illogical' statements or contradictions or anything that goes against human nature.

Homophobic, no. Misogynistic, most certainly not. Genital mutilating? Supporting genocide? Far, far from it.

Qur'an actually contains the best teachings of all religions and transformed uncivilised Arabs into the most advanced, morally upright and dignified people of the time. If the Muslims actually followed it to the letter today, they wouldn't be in the dire and miserable state they are in today.

It teaches kindness to parents, orphans, neighbours, the poor and needy. It condemns those who kill others. It lays down rules and laws for the benefit of society. It teaches peace, forgiveness and love above all. It teaches that we are all answerable for our deeds, so we must live a morally perfect life and serve our fellow man to be successful in this life and in the hereafter. This is the crux of some of the main relevant teachings. Ask me for references if you want.

Now tell me if such a book should or shouldn't be taken seriously.

So think twice about condemning a religious book without first having not even studied it properly.

[Inverse]

(Original post by tif49)
Firstly, what illogical rubbish?

Secondly yes the Bible may have been interpolated and unreliable but the Qur'an is complete and intact and contains no such 'illogical' statements or contradictions or anything that goes against human nature.

Homophobic, no. Misogynistic, most certainly not. Genital mutilating? Supporting genocide? Far, far from it.

Qur'an actually contains the best teachings of all religions and transformed uncivilised Arabs into the most advanced, morally upright and dignified people of the time. If the Muslims actually followed it to the letter today, they wouldn't be in the dire and miserable state they are in today.

It teaches kindness to parents, orphans, neighbours, the poor and needy. It condemns those who kill others. It lays down rules and laws for the benefit of society. It teaches peace, forgiveness and love above all. It teaches that we are all answerable for our deeds, so we must live a morally perfect life and serve our fellow man to be successful in this life and in the hereafter. This is the crux of some of the main relevant teachings. Ask me for references if you want.

Now tell me if such a book should or shouldn't be taken seriously.

So think twice about condemning a religious book without first having not even studied it properly.

I don't need to study it. I actively read books written by intellectuals who have studied it, and after a reasonable amount of time doing so, I have built up a good understanding of religion and its tyrannical nature.

You are absolutely hilarious. It's almost as if you are a successful troll; the Qur'an is possibly the most disgusting of all the religious desert stories. Even attempting to defend it leaves you looking like a brainwashed fool. Don't play pick and mix, the Qur'an (along with many other nonsensical texts) implies that you are endlessly governed as a slave by a tyrannical higher entity, why would you want this? Are you a masochist? I don't think I need to embarrass you and list all of the disgusting, unacceptable and horrific instructions from the Qur'an, you are perfectly aware of what I am referring to. You don't pick things out of it and base your understanding on that, you either follow the whole thing, or stop dwindling in idiocy and don't follow it at all.

[Hypocrism]

(Original post by tif49)
Firstly, what illogical rubbish?

Secondly yes the Bible may have been interpolated and unreliable but the Qur'an is complete and intact and contains no such 'illogical' statements or contradictions or anything that goes against human nature.

Homophobic, no. Misogynistic, most certainly not. Genital mutilating? Supporting genocide? Far, far from it.

Qur'an actually contains the best teachings of all religions and transformed uncivilised Arabs into the most advanced, morally upright and dignified people of the time. If the Muslims actually followed it to the letter today, they wouldn't be in the dire and miserable state they are in today.

It teaches kindness to parents, orphans, neighbours, the poor and needy. It condemns those who kill others. It lays down rules and laws for the benefit of society. It teaches peace, forgiveness and love above all. It teaches that we are all answerable for our deeds, so we must live a morally perfect life and serve our fellow man to be successful in this life and in the hereafter. This is the crux of some of the main relevant teachings. Ask me for references if you want.

Now tell me if such a book should or shouldn't be taken seriously.

So think twice about condemning a religious book without first having not even studied it properly.

The following is why I do not like religious texts as a basis for morality. Almost all parts of the text are good (or neutral) and these are the bits that most people focus on, and follow to the benefit of their moral fibre. However. There are always areas that were mistakenly included that do not follow the good morals that the majority of the text shows, including justice and respect and so forth, which imply incorrect moral views like I'm going to include below. These bits must by definition be taken seriously by people following that religion, because their scripture is regarded to be divine and absolute. It is true that the huge majority of people following the religion are good people, but they have made the choice to discount verses like the below. That means they're making a moral decision on their own, which to me makes the religious text unnecessary-I think most religious people are actually good because they are just good people, not because their beliefs tell them to be good. Unfortunately, when something is regarded as morally absolute, it creates issues, however subjectively "good" or "evil" it might be. You can easily do thought experiments to show how problematic it can be to take an absolute stance on something.

"The share of the male shall be twice that of a female"

"And let two men from among you bear witness to all such documents [contracts of loans without interest]. But if two men be not available, there should be one man and two women to bear witness so that if one of the women forgets (anything), the other may remind her."

"And forbidden to you are wedded wives of other people except those who have fallen in your hands [as prisoners of war]"

"O Prophet, when you [and the believers] divorce women, divorce them for their prescribed waiting—period and count the waiting—period accurately . . . 4 And if you are in doubt about those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, (you should know that) their waiting period is three months, and the same applies to those who have not menstruated as yet. As for pregnant women, their period ends when they have delivered their burden."

[Blackburn_Allen]

(Original post by Inverse)
I don't need to study it. I actively read books written by intellectuals who have studied it, and after a reasonable amount of time doing so, I have built up a good understanding of religion and its tyrannical nature.

You are absolutely hilarious. It's almost as if you are a successful troll; the Qur'an is possibly the most disgusting of all the religious desert stories. Even attempting to defend it leaves you looking like a brainwashed fool. Don't play pick and mix, the Qur'an (along with many other nonsensical texts) implies that you are endlessly governed as a slave by a tyrannical higher entity, why would you want this? Are you a masochist? I don't think I need to embarrass you and list all of the disgusting, unacceptable and horrific instructions from the Qur'an, you are perfectly aware of what I am referring to. You don't pick things out of it and base your understanding on that, you either follow the whole thing, or stop dwindling in idiocy and don't follow it at all.

Couldn't have put it more eloquently myself. The slave-master relationship that a theist has with their particular faith can only be described as sado-masochistic. The will to live in this Orwellian society, in which morality can only be achieved through forced dedication to a specific deity, and eventually embrace an apocalypse through the "reckoning", judgement day or whatever other name you put on it, confuses me. The messianic monotheistic individual can not be described as logical and thus the book in which their beliefs stem from can only be described as illogical.

Also, I had to laugh at that guys will to force Islam down our throats. How apt.

[Inverse]

(Original post by Blackburn_Allen)
Couldn't have put it more eloquently myself. The slave-master relationship that a theist has with their particular faith can only be described as sado-masochistic. The will to live in this Orwellian society, in which morality can only be achieved through forced dedication to a specific deity, and eventually embrace an apocalypse through the "reckoning", judgement day or whatever other name you put on it, confuses me. The messianic monotheistic individual can not be described as logical and thus the book in which their beliefs stem from can only be described as illogical.

Also, I had to laugh at that guys will to force Islam down our throats. How apt.

I agree completely. It's a shame that these cretins are about as useful to argue with as a brick wall. It feels like your efforts are wasted sometimes.

[tif49]

(Original post by Inverse)
I don't need to study it. I actively read books written by intellectuals who have studied it, and after a reasonable amount of time doing so, I have built up a good understanding of religion and its tyrannical nature.

You are absolutely hilarious. It's almost as if you are a successful troll; the Qur'an is possibly the most disgusting of all the religious desert stories. Even attempting to defend it leaves you looking like a brainwashed fool. Don't play pick and mix, the Qur'an (along with many other nonsensical texts) implies that you are endlessly governed as a slave by a tyrannical higher entity, why would you want this? Are you a masochist? I don't think I need to embarrass you and list all of the disgusting, unacceptable and horrific instructions from the Qur'an, you are perfectly aware of what I am referring to. You don't pick things out of it and base your understanding on that, you either follow the whole thing, or stop dwindling in idiocy and don't follow it at all.

How can you judge a book without even having read it?? If you're going to read one-sided, prejudiced anti-Islamic books, then of course that's the view you will get.

I believe in every single letter of the Qur'an. It's you who picks and chooses and makes baseless judgements without knowing the true teachings. I mean, come on, you haven't even read it, how are you to know what it truly preaches.

I believe in it all while you ignore those commandments of peace, love and charity. I don't actually know what in the world you are referring to. The majority of the Qur'an, had you read it you would know, talks about One God. About the creation of the earth and all that is in it. It tells us to ponder over things and reflect. It teaches kindness to parents, orphans. It repeatedly teaches about forgiveness, peace above all and patience.

True, there may be some verses which to some people who have no knowledge and haven't even read it, may seem 'horrible' at first viewing. But if you were to actually see the entire context and background on the verse rather than making judgements without any knowledge, you'd see that there are very relevant and wise teachings.

Moreover, you can't just read one verse and make your judgements on that. Quranic verses supplement one another. You have to understand it in it's entirety which you claim I don't. Rather it is you who picks and chooses the seemingly 'horrible' verses' as you are already blinded with your extreme prejudice and hate towards it. What have you to say about the verses which clearly speak of love and peace?

Any 'horrible' verses have to be understood in the context and taking into view all the other verses related to the matter.

So go and read it for yourself before coming here with your sheer arrogance and ignorance about the Qur'an.