Varför Islam är den rimligaste och mest sanna religionen och tro

Koranen har inte legitimitet till att vara det ultimative underlag för en tolkning av kristendomen.

Vattendelnings-frågan (även om det kanske inte var en medveten lögn).

Top 5 worst verses in the Qur’an 43
This entry was posted in religion and tagged bible quran on November 28, 2016 by Dave
quran-imageHere is a list of the top 5 worst verses in the Qur’an. Be aware, some of them are quite repulsive and truly frightening …

“This is what Allah says… ‘Now go and strike the Infidel and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.” Surah 27:63

“Happy is he who repays the infidel for what they have done to us – he who seizes their infants and dashes them against the rocks.” – Surah 34:12

“So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight. When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. He said to her, ‘Get up; let’s go.’ But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.” – Surah 135:27

“A Wife, must submit to her husband as to Allah.” – Surah 5:22

“When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.” – Surah 21: 7-8

That is clearly truly vile stuff and rather obvious proof that all Muslims are wicked evil people … right?

Ask yourself this. Knowing that you now know that the above verses are in the Qur’an, how do you now feel about the book?

Perhaps you have actually read the Qur’an and are already familiar with those verses.

OK, I have a confession to make, I cheated. None of these verses actually exist in the Qur’an at all. Instead I took a few bible verses and simply injected the word “Allah” instead of the word “God” and injected the word “infidel” in to make it sound Islamic. Here are those original bible verses …

“This is what the Lord Almighty says… ‘Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” 1 Samuel 15:3

“Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us – he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.” – Psalm 137:9

“So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight. When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. He said to her, ‘Get up; let’s go.’ But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.” Judges 19:25-28

“Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.” – Ephesians 5:22

“When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.” – Exodus 21: 7-8

So my point is this. You can take almost any religious text and quote-mine it for whatever agenda you might have. For example you can pick out all the nice stuff, discard the rather obviously not-so-nice bits, and claim it is like no other book and is uniquely divine. Alternatively, you can pluck out the not-so-nice stuff and hold it up as “evidence” that all those that revere the text are obnoxious evil bastards.

The truth is that we live in a world where humans are generally born into a culture that has a specific religious tradition. Associated with it will be a religious text that generally nobody tends to actually read or be familiar with. If some do become aware of some of the dubious bits, then they will rationalise it. Perhaps they will tell themselves that it was the word that was needed at that time but does not apply now, or perhaps they might conclude that they simply don’t understand it correctly, or that it has not been translated correctly?

Why don’t we see it for what it actually is saying?
Basically because we have invested a lot of time and emotion in the culturally inherited belief. To preserve that belief and not upset others around us by displaying doubt, we rationalise away such thoughts.

The books themselves reflect their actual origins and so they will contain not only nice noble stuff, but will also articulate some truly obnoxious stuff. The core problem is the idea that they are the ultimate and literal source of truth and guidance because they were divinely inspired in some manner. Once you accept that idea then you are in a position where, when faced with a choice between tradition or basic human decency, tradition will dominate for emotional reasons.

Humans resists such literalism and do often reject the divine literal truth hypothesis by simply reading the obnoxious bits as metaphors, and not directives to be followed to the letter. This has generally been the road followed to tame the fundamentalist modality that once dominated Christianity and is also the same road that many strands of Islamic thinking are walking to achieve the same ends.

Much of our history has been a struggle between such literalist traditions and cultural insights into a better way. For example, take the concept of slavery. It was once culturally acceptable and part of the normal fabric of society, hence such religious texts reflect that and are generally pro-slavery. Read either the Qur’an or the Bible cover to cover and you will discover that there is not a single word that suggests that slavery is not moral. Now that is interesting, because today slavery is almost universally regarded as morally wrong. It still exists, but is not considered decent or right.

The bondage the bible talks about is now viewed as a form a spiritual slavery and not a literal slavery, and so our far better morality can and does prevail.

Slavery
I’m really not kidding about those texts being pro-slavery.

In the Bible we find explicit instructions on whom you may enslave, and also explicit instructions on how to correctly beat your slave (Apparently it is OK as long as your slave is still alive a few days after the beating). If the bible is your book, then your immediate thought will be, “Ah but that is the Old Testament, we now have the New Testament”. But let’s not forget that the New Testament is also pro-slavery. Paul specifically directed Christian slaves to obey their masters, and did not even once drop a hint that the concert of slavery was wrong.

In the Qur’an we also find explicit instructions on whom you may enslave. If you are familiar with it then you will know that traditional Islamic law covers the topic at great length. If the Qur’an is your book, then the immediate thought will be that Islam greatly improved things for slaves and made it all a lot better. But you need to consider that the Qur’an is still supposedly the final ultimate word on the topic and yet endorses the concept and does not identify it as morally wrong as we do today.

Questions
If indeed these religious texts are the ultimate source of morality, are truly divine, and yet are also completely silent on the topic of slavery being morally wrong, then how exactly did we as a species come to the conclusion that slavery is wrong?
If indeed slavery is morally wrong (Hint: yes it is, and I truly and very earnestly hope that you did not need that hint), then you need to be aware that you are already rejecting the moral stance taken by all these religious texts on that topic. It is not just you, almost everybody alive today does. So how did that happen, how is it possible for us to have embraced a moral conclusion that is far superior to all these religious texts?
How is it possible for your religious text to be the ultimate unquestioned source of moral guidance, yet you personally hold a superior morality?

https://www.skeptical-science.com/religion/top-5-worst-verses-quran/

Det är möjligheten för att kunne applicera en viss grad av självorganisation utan externt tvång.

What Does Islam Teach About...
Violence
Does the Quran really contain over a hundred verses that sanction violence?

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that speak of war with nonbelievers, usually on the basis of their status as non-Muslims. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence...................

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx


Violence in the Quran
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
This article's lead section does not adequately summarize key points of its contents. (November 2015)
This article contains too many or too-lengthy quotations for an encyclopedic entry. (December 2017)
Part of a series on
Criticism of religion
By religion[show]
By religious figure[show]
By text[show]
Religious violence[show]
Related topics[show]
vte
The Quran, the holy book of Islam, contains verses believed by Muslims to be revealed to the Islamic prophet Muhammad at different times and under different circumstances – some exhorting violence against enemies and others urging restraint and conciliation. Because some verses abrogate others, and because some are thought to be general commands while other refer to specific enemies, how the verses are understood and how they relate to each other "has been a central issue in Islamic thinking on war" according to scholars such as Charles Matthews.[1]

While numerous scholars explain Quranic phrases on violence to be only in the context of a defensive response to oppression;[2][3][4][5][6] violent groups have interpreted verses to endorse their violent actions[7] and made the Quran's teachings on violence and war a topic of vigorous debate.[8][9].....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_in_the_Quran

Så: Belägg för att den judiska tron (och islam) berättar sanningen om 'gud', tack.

Inte mera problematisk än att koranen spekulerar och/eller fabulerar över det.

Icke desto mindra är islam långtifrån énhetligt. (Nu har du börjat att ljuga.)

Jag upprepar vad jag har sagt. Det finns ingenting rimligt med religion.

Judendomen, kristendomen och islam är tre religioner som alla beskriver gud på samma sätt: Gud är en sorts mänsklig (total-övermänsklig, men likväl mänsklig), manlig (superduper, YYYYYYYYYYYYY-kromosom-manlig) "hjälte-spegel" av mänskligheten (eller snarare av manligheten). Så här ungefär:

https://res.cloudinary.com/jerrick/image/upload/f_auto,fl_progressive,q_auto,c_fit,w_680/ehin3nu3bfxixp5p9nak

Fast guden borde väl ha haft svart hår och skägg i stället för blont. Okej.

Och den här superduper-hjältespegeln av sig själv använder manligheten för att tillskriva sig själv en rent löjlig makt över hela universum. Gäsp.

Man undrar bara hur det kan gå så illa för en massa länder som ändå tror på sin gud på rätt sätt.

Så du menar att ofalsifierbara anekdoter/postulat gör islam "rimlig"?

Får muslimska troende kvinnor gifta sig med flera män?

(Ljugar du medvetet?).

Koranens verklighets-beskrivning är helt åt skogen.