I’m unclear on this issue. Did Allah will the resent tsunami that killed 26,000 people Japan or did he allow it? I see no reason for Him to will such an event unless He simply wanted to punish the Japanese for not embracing Islam and that seems cruel. Or did Allah simply allow the tsunami? If so He is totally indifferent to human suffering.
Calamity, suffering and mere unpleasantness are integral parts of Humanity's existence in this life. God's purpose encompasses reminding us of how fleeting life is and why we shouldn't get so attached to it that we forget what lies beyond. Suffering can happen to even the most devout of believers. God's favorite human creations, his messengers to Humanity, all suffered during their lifetimes. Enduring that suffering and adhering to faith leads to great reward in this life and in Heaven.
A true Muslim believer? Then it would follow that there are also false Muslim believers. How do we tell the difference? What is the litmus test and what is the percentage of true believers to false believers? Are false Muslim believers simply misguided or are they malevolent?
When a religion is a template and guide for one's every moment of existence, it follows that people will follow and adhere to it to varying degrees. The greater a person's faith the more observant of their religion's teachings they will be. Of course, every sentient adult is a mixture of good and evil, virtue and vice. The same person doesn’t behave in the same way every day but when one adheres to a set of values it shows in their conduct. The litmus test is how a person conducts themselves and treats others. The extremist masterminds are certainly malevolent while their simple followers are misguided, manipulated pawns.
In the early twentieth century the ulama prohibited the dissection of human bodies in the medical schools. How could the Islamic intellectual elite have been so wrong? Even today there are Muslims who say that even in text books images of the human body, or anything created my Allah, is forbidden. What makes their interpretation of Islam false and yours correct?
The Islamic university of Al-Azhar in Cairo taught that the sun circles the earth until forced to adopt the Copernican system by the Egyptian government in 1961.
During the time of the Ottoman Empire the Muslim World descended into a period of ignorance the traces of which continue today. I can say with conviction that an average Muslim in the year 1900 was far less enlightened than their counterpart in the year 900. When scientific research in the Muslim World ground to a halt every new discovery was regarded as heresy. You may already know that in Andalusia Muslim physicians used to teach visiting European students surgery. I take no pride in the generation of Ulama or scholars of the 18th thru 20th centuries. They behaved much like their Christian counterparts of the Middle Ages.
What you are saying is that there are limits to reason and deduction and in such cases reason must take a back seat to revealed knowledge. That is to say that science is not complementary to religion but inferior to it.
Think of the physical world as a circle inside a larger circle, the metaphysical world. Revealed knowledge acts as a driver, rather than a limiter, of deduction and reasoning because one never knows where the line separating the two worlds and thus the limit of exploration lies. An easy example would be the treatment of life-threatening trauma. A Muslim ER doctor must do all they can to save a life in danger until they can do no more. And when new tools improve the chances for saving lives they should use those tools. There are verses in the Qur'an that instruct Muslims to look, ponder and explore God's creations without self-imposed limits. And other verses that tell Humanity that it knows very little about its Maker's creations. That is interpreted as an encouragement, not the opposite.
Will this explanation stop even one homicide bomber?
One can only hope that, as ignorance gives way to knowledge, it would. Most bombers are ignorant pawns, often with a vendetta.
Innocent of what? I have been told that a Jewish child of any age is guilty of trespassing on Arab land if he or she is living in the illegal state of Israel and is therefore a legitimate target. I have been told that as an American I am guilty of supporting a nation that supports the illegal state of Israel and that makes me and my children a legitimate target. Is anyone anywhere innocent?
The prophet had stated unambiguously that all pre-pubescent children are innocent and all go to Heaven regardless of what their parents' religion is. The idea that all Jews and all Americans are the enemy is, thankfully, dying away with the dinosaur Arab regimes that had exploited it. It has taken me decades to realize that not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews. I owe that realization to the members of Naturei Karta and scholars such as Norman Finkelstein. I understand that there are indigenous Jews in the land of Palestine who have lived there for centuries and who are every bit the owners of the land as the Palestinian Muslims and Christians. And I don't blame the American people for the foreign policy of the United States. If the events of the last decade have shown anything it is that they are helpless to change those policies.
reply
share
reade-1
13 years ago
Let’s consider another example. In any islamic court of law the testimony of a woman, no matter how accomplished she might be, counts for only half that of a man, no matter how much of a low life he might be. Muslims say that this is not done to degrade their wives, sisters and mothers, it is only done to serve justice. The Qur'an states that the morality, truthfulness and intelligence of any women is half that of a man and so her testimony can never carry equal weight.
Now let’s say that a woman cognitive psychologist does a study that shows that the testimony of a woman can be just as reliable as that of a man. What happens now? Will scientific test results make an islamic court of law give equal weight to a woman? Of course not. When science comes into conflict with the Qur’an science loses every time. Science and Islam can never be complementary.
reply
share
najdier
13 years ago
In any Islamic court of law the testimony of a woman, no matter how accomplished she might be, counts for only half that of a man, no matter how much of a low life he might be.
That is simply not true. The verse in the Qur'an that specifies both the number and gender of witnesses has to do with the transaction between a lender and a borrower. It is not even a command but a recommendation to provide the lender with a guarantee for the loan about to be provided. That verse is understood to mean that, should one of the female witnesses not recall the details of the transaction then the other would remind her. Ultimately, satisfaction with the guarantee is left to the discretion of the parties themselves, even if it involved no witnesses at all. In legal testimony there is no discrimination between men and women, period. If the burden of proof includes witness testimony there is no gender restriction.
The Qur'an states that the morality, truthfulness and intelligence of any women is half that of a man and so her testimony can never carry equal weight.
The Qur'an I know says nothing of the sort. If you know where it says that, please direct me to it.
When science comes into conflict with the Qur’an science loses every time. Science and Islam can never be complementary.
I have never heard of such conflict, but you seem to have reached your own conclusion nevertheless.
GMT+3, no DST
reply
share