Author Topic: PRACTICABILITY OF THE QURAN  (Read 4606 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline shabeer_hassan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
PRACTICABILITY OF THE QURAN
« on: February 17, 2013, 03:34:49 AM »
As all the religious scriptures were influenced by the process of Divine revelation most of the righteous codes of conduct are practicable. But these scriptures have, nevertheless, been subjected to human manipulations. It is for the same reason that these compositions will contain, in the legislations made within, the shortcomings in the vision of those who had composed them. Indeed, such legislation will have been relevant in the age in which it was composed or it will find its relevance in the vision of its own composer alone. In fact, legislations of such nature can never claim for themselves the status of applicability for all time.

For instance, consider the recommendation of the New Testament of the Bible on the issue of divorce: "...... anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to commit adultery, and anyone who marries a woman so divorced commits adultery." (Mathew 5:32) "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife." (I Corinthians 7:10, 11)

The legislation that is inherent in these statements are as given below:

1. The wife should not be cast aside except for the reason of being unfaithful.

2. The wife can not, under any circumstance, divorce her husband.

3. If, however, she has to separate from her husband, she must, thenceforth, live alone.

4. None should marry a divorced woman.

5. The sexual relation with a divorced woman even if it be after marriage, is tantamount to an act of adultery.

It need not be mentioned here that these laws are, in themselves, not practicable. In fact, those who advocate the cause of these laws have failed to produce the solution to the problems that have been mentioned hereunder :

1. Family relations are built but on the firm foundations of the emotional attachment between husband and wife. Apart from lack of fidelity, there are numerous other problems that may arise between husband and wife. The Bible does not provide for any legislation, whatsoever, for the solution of such and similar problems. Is it correct to cast forever, into a virtual state of hell, individuals who have been so separated in the domains of the mind and the spirit as to never come together again, solely for the reason that they have been married to each other? What, indeed, will be the mentality of the children who grow up with parents who have separated from each other in the domain of the mind and spirit? Has it been possible for the Bible to provide solutions to the grave problems that may arise between men and women by way of making of the marriage wedlock a bond that can in no way be broken? What, indeed, is the solution ?

2. It is the instruction of Paul that if the wife, under compelling circumstances, were to disassociate from her husband, she is not to marry again. However, the New Testament does not teach as to who it is that must then protect her. In a strictly humanitarian sense, is not the commandment of Paul that "she must remain unmarried" a great cruelty considering the fact that nothing else has been mentioned by way of a practical solution in satisfying her yearning for sexual fulfillment as well as her longing to love and to be loved after divorce? Has the Bible any solution for these problems ?

3. What is the justification for the commandment which prohibits one man from marrying a woman who has been divorced by another? Supposing that a Christian woman has been divorced by her cruel husband who is, for all practical purposes, a rejector of God. As far as he is concerned, the ruling of the Bible is not applicable in his case. If such a woman then desires to lead a family life of purity, will not the ruling of the Bible become impracticable before her? Which other way can the Bible put before her in this predicament?

4. What justification can there be for the claim that if a divorced woman is married to another man, it would be equal to committing adultery? If, however, such a marriage does take place what alternative can the Bible show by recourse to which the sexual relationship between them can be made legal ?

This is, in fact, the condition with some of the rulings in the other religions scriptures as well. They contain, within themselves, laws which are not practicable. The Manu Smrithi deals with the case of widows in this fashion: "When her husband is dead she may fast as much as she likes, (living) on anspicious flowers, roots and fruits, but she should not even mention the name of another man. She should be long-suffering until death, self-restrained, and chaste, striving (to fulfil) the unsurpassed duty of women who have one husband." (Manu Smrithi 5:157, 158).

The cruelty to which this law makes subject the women who have become widows owing to the death of their husbands in the prime of their youth need not be further mentioned here. That she is refused the right to remarry will ultimately lead her to a life of immorality. Thus the consequences of this law will have to be borne forcibly by both individual and society. Indeed, such laws will stand as an obstacle in the creation of a sound society and, for that reason, and that reason alone, will remain as impracticable as ever.

This, however, is not the case with the injunctions of the Quran. None of its rulings are impracticable. Going by any of the standards of human reckoning nothing, whatsoever, that is of an impracticable or immoral nature can be deciphered from the Quranic laws.

Offline JesusisGod

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • View Profile
Re: PRACTICABILITY OF THE QURAN
« Reply #1 on: July 23, 2014, 12:26:20 AM »
The very first sentence you post is flawed for if all scriptures had been inspired by God an all powerful being would not let any body alter His words. Your quran says Gods words cannot be changed and implies that only |God can change them in another verse. I could talk about that possibility later, but the point remains you are stuck with a God who's words have either changed and have been manipulated in the past in which case He is untrustworthy or the fact that many different "holy books" contradict in which case neither are trustworthy. The truth is by its very nature divisive and only one truth exists. I believe Jesus is the truth so that would rule out |Islam in my mind because it contradicts the truth of Jesus' Resurrection death and Deity I will never say that other books are also from God because it is not what I believe. I stand up for what I believe I suggest you do the same

What Muslim would go against the words of the prophet Jesus? The quote from Matthew are the words of Jesus. Jesus is Gods ultimate revelation of God to mankind because He is bot fully God and Fully man He can show us and tell us Who God His father, and mine, is. The fact that it disagrees with verses in the quran is what i believe is the main fuel to fire this attack on the morality of God. One of the major problems I see coming up in your posts is the fact that when God speaks He isn't trying to fix society. You suggests that Islam answers tough questions and is applicable to societies through out all time, yet why would God lower His standard to fix the problems of a broken society. Marriage is a covenant relationship between one man and his wife. It is a representation of Gods covenant with those whom He saves as  such God only expects what is fitting a divorce is not an option. A covenant is a covenant follow through. God does He expects men to do the same. Whats really troubling are the teachings of the Quran that allow that which is against created Law God made eve from adam they were made for each other to leave eve would mean no more sex for Adam because every one else was his daughter sex was made to be between one man and one woman not one man and up to nine. We see this as Paul tells us that a widow would be better off not marrying if her husband dies. You may think these laws don't deal with the problems in todays society but any other revelation by Jesus would reveal a standard which is lower than perfection. This is something I would never expect from God. Forget society if our God can't be perfect society already crumbles. Since when are Gods standards or laws supposed to help society from crumbling God is in authority were He to cave here so women could have their sexual desires fullfilled then what kind of God would He be. He would be no better than the Americans that caved and allowed women to get abortions because they were doing it already any way and they couldn't or just cant stop having sex so they will murder instead. Your suggesting |God allow adultery because women want to have sex get real. God's standards are high, but that is just because He is just that perfect. If a woman can't have sex after divorce then maybe she will choose her commitments better. If a woman divorces many husbands and sleeps with them all is she not an adulterous. God tells us she is and so is a man who does the same. God's laws are meant to show us how utterly sinful we are not to fix society although if we followed them perfectly then society would not be broken in the first place.

Paul makes no distinction Paul didn't want men or women getting divorced

 Point 1 is way off in islam perhaps but family relations in the bible are built on God Emotions are rocky at best and completly unstable at worst God is a rock He is unchanging any and all family relations are based on Him man is the head of his wife and Jesus (God) is the head of man. The bible doesn't need to provide legislation laws condemn God leads us with His Spirit laws are for slaves Jesus set us free. Its hard to explain that concept but Jesus put it best anyone who sins is a slave of sin and laws reflect that slavery God stopped talking to His people through laws because they are weak they could never accomplish the freedom of men from sin because they are weak they depend on sinful men to carry them out. God Himself The Spirit lives inside of me and He controls me. Any good I do is truly good because it was God who has done it. Sin is dead because i died with Christ on the cross and all of my sins were forgiven the law has no affect once a man dies, but I have new life in Christ. |If you want Gods answer to society's problems the answer is the gospel Jesus is God's answer for the problems in society because only God can transform people from the inside out. Laws only bring wrath and punishment to the disobedient.

point 2 is dead wrong pual is talking to Christians. He doesn't need to tell the people of |God what to do with a woman in need because Christians aren't under a law we do by nature what God want we will take care of any one in need. If a christian is divorced and she doesn't want to marry because she sees it would please God then i as her brother in Christ will take care of her. Paul doesn't tell us what to do he reminds us that this would be good if it needs to be written down it is. God's love is sufficient I know a man who's wife left him and he lived a perfectly happy life with his brothers and sisters in Christ God is enough for us Christians his love is greater than mans love we can both receive this love and express it to others. Not sure what you mean their exists a love outside of marriage.         

point 3 God said so enough said. Seriously if every person had this high standard of marriage their would be more commitment inside of the marriage and men and women would both make wiser decisions in their choice of a mate. Marriage does not full fill a person impracticable If i live in harmony with God the Father God The Son and God The Holy Spirit they will full fill me in a way that the world can't. God is not telling us these things because it is a law he is telling Christians what will full fill them as His Children.

 Point 4 adultery is sex with someone beside your spouse. When people make a commitment to get married they are making a commitment for life. If I promise to do something, should i not follow through with it? It is better not to promise then to promise and not follow through Jesus says this. You wouldn't say that promises should be broken would you? I'm sure you would agree that it is better for the person not to promise then to not promise. The disciples understood this so they said its better not to get married. Your focusing on sex try seeing marriage as what it is. A man and a woman make a promise before God to stay together till death? Should a man break a promise to God for sex? Their is no legal action that God provides for a woman to cheat on the promise they made to somebody else and to God it is adultery in his eyes she commits adultery every time she has sex with a new "husband". |It is adultery God tells us this If you don't like it take it up with Him don't expect God or Christians to justify sin. |Of course when the spouse dies she no longer sins. She should seek to be reconciled to her husband not to have sex with another guy.   

Offline shabeer_hassan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
Re: PRACTICABILITY OF THE QURAN
« Reply #2 on: September 27, 2014, 03:54:26 AM »
What is the evidence in favour of the Quran being a practicable book?

The greatest proof for the Quran being a practicable book is the very revolution that has been wrought by it. If we examine the condition of Arabia before and after the revelation of the Quran, we will be convinced of the practicable nature of the Quran.

A society which was steeped in the darkness created by blind superstitions; which was drugged in the addiction to wine and intoxicants; which showed not the least hesitation in the spilling of blood over senseless conflicts to assert tribal superiority; which was nowhere in the matter of knowledge and learning; which was ignorant in the field of health care; which remained backward in the field of agriculture; which lacked cohesiveness as a political and military bloc. This was the history of Arabia before the revelation of the Quran.

When we look upon the Arabia after the revelation of the Quran, however, it is the picture of the standard bearers of a civilization that challenged, in its greatness, all the other civilizations of the day, which we witness. Indeed, they had attained to such prominence as to stand higher that the Greeks who were the masters of the day in the fields of science and technology. Alexandria was soon replaced by Baghdad as the greatest centre of learning and culture. Furthermore, they now caused to tremble even the empires of Rome and Persia both of which had enjoyed the legacy of political leadership that was centuries old. The Arabs, who engaged in internicine tribal warfare and the wanton spilling of blood, had now emerged as the flag bearers of unity and cohesiveness. Not having known what morality and immorality were, they now became the chief propagators of a moral code. The Holy Quran had truly succeeded in remoulding Arabian society into one which would prove to be exemplary for the whole world; and that too within the span of a mere 23 years.

The Quran has, thus, been a book that enabled an entire race, which had been nowhere in the fields of culture and civilization, to attain to the very pinnacle of human development within the short span of twenty three years. In fact, there has not been another book that equalled it in so transforming the whole world. The fact becomes abundantly clear here that there has not been any other writing like the Quran which has proved to be as practicable in guiding humanity to the path of righteousness.

In reality, none of the critics of the Quran has been able to prove the non-practicability of any of the laws enshrined in it, in an impartial and factual manner.

Do not the other religious scriptures also prescribe an exemplary code of righteous conduct ?

It is true that all religious scriptures do, indeed, provide for certain moral injunctions. It is also true that some of the remnants of the ideals taught by the messengers, located as they are in the moral prescriptions of various religious scriptures, do conform to the teachings of the Qur'an itself. However, the moral injunctions in the Qur'an have certain basic differences with those of the other religious scriptures. These can be summarized as follows:

One : There are only divine commandments in the Qur'an. In the other religious books, on the other hand, along with the description of divine commandments there also exists the laws that were the fabrication of the priests themselves. Indeed, they have become so intertwined, one with the other, that it is now impossible to understand the exact position of each.

Two : The prohibitions and recommendations of the Qur'an are out-and-out humane. Other religious texts, however, contain certain legal prescriptions that are inhuman. For instance, in the first epistle to the Corinthians, Paul wrote: " ..... it is good of a man not to marry." (1 Cor 7:1) and " ... he who does not marry.... does even better." (1 Cor. 7:38). If all men were to follow this ‘better’ prescription, the human race itself would become non-existent in a few decades time. It is, however, not possible to locate such prescriptions in the Qur'an.

Three : None of the injunctions of the Qur'an command violence or injustice. Other religious scriptures, however, do give out the call to violence and injustice. For instance, in the Kaushithaki Brahmanopanishad, Indran is quoted as saying, "Na’Mathravadena na Pithravadena nasthayena na broona hathys nasya paapam chana chakrasho mukaneelam vetheethi" (3:1) (Even if my people were to kill their mother and father; even if they were to steal and to practice infanticide; even if they were to commit such sins, they are to feel no remorse. Their faces should never be down-cast)

Four : There is nothing that is despicable in the legal prescription of the Qur'an. However, in some of the other religious scriptures there is a clear distinction between a person of a higher caste and another of a lower caste. For example, consider the punishment prescribed by the Manu Smrithi for insult and abuse: "The punishment for the Kshatriya who insults the Brahman is one hundred coins; for the Vaishya it will be two hundred coins and for the Shudra it will be the whip. If the Brahman were to insult the Kshatriya his punishment would be fifty coins, if he insults the vaishya it would be twenty five coins and if the Shudra, twelve coins." (Manu Smrithi 8:267, 268)

Five : There are no legal prescriptions of an impracticable nature in the Qur'an. Other religious texts prescribes certain laws which are impracticable. Look at the ruling concerning divorce in the Bible: "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery ...." (Luke 16:18)

In fact, Christians today admit that this law of the Bible which prohibits divorce is, indeed, not practicable. This is evident in the efforts of the Christian assemblies, to bring forth a new legislation that does allow for divorce.

Six : The Qur'an describes the history of the prophets who, by way of being the protagonists of the code of righteousness prescribed by the Qur'an, were made pure and blessed. Although the other religious scriptures do state that the prophets were pure and blessed, their lives have, nevertheless, been depicted in the most vulgar fashion. Noah who is rendered a drunkard and one who exposes his nakedness (Genesis 9:20-23), Lot who gets drunk and cohabits with his daughters (Genesis 19:31-36), Jacob who deceives (Genesis 27:1-36), David who lures women into his bed-chamber (2 Samuel 11:2-5) : are these people to be the role models? Great personalities have also been mentioned in the Hindu Puranas in a similar fashion. Form Shri Ram himself who is depicted as the one who kills the Shudra Shambukan (Valmiki Ramayan Yudha Kandam) and as the one who abandons his pregnant wife in the forest (UttaraKandam) to Shri Krishna who is depicted as the one who steals the clothes of the bathing gopikas..... and as the one who commits violence and treachery in war, the descriptions which we see in the vedas are, indeed, unfaithful ones. In this light, can it be said that they were the ones who had established the moral law? As for the Qur'an, it teaches that all prophets were pure, and exemplary, in the conduct of their lives. The history which the Qur'an does put forward bears ample testimony to the facts of this matter.