The doctrine of abrogation: Is it “real”?
Posted: 30 July 2008 03:02 AM   [ Ignore ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1243
Joined  2006-12-26

Briefly stated (on basis of some ayas in Sura 2), the doctrine of abrogation within Islam says that insofar as there is a conflict between two verses in the Quran, it is the the latest revealed verse that has ultimate validity, abrogating the previous one.

This has important consequences, of life and death, actually, since ALL the peaceful verses of the Quran were composed at Mecca, all of them abrogated by Medinan verses like “Kill the infidels wherever you find them”.
It is the Medinan verses that are to be followed for the Muslim, if there is a conflict between that and some Meccan verses.


Now, one might ask, isn’t this “doctrine of abrogation” some obscure, medieaval concept that scaremongers bring forth against Islam?
Does it have any reality at all?

Then my first contention would be that it is NOT an obscure, irrational and medieaval principle at all, but rather, one of the most fundamental concepts of all modern jurisprudence:

If I find a law from 1824 in the US law system and says that this contradicts a law given in 1999, WHICH ONE has the validity in our society today?

Obviously, the law from 1999, not the one from 1824..

In general, a legislator is always given the power to abrogate former laws that he has the authority to legislate.

Therefore, only those laws are held valid in a society that does not go against the laws promulgated by the CURRENT LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY(LEGISLATOR!


But this is EXACTLY that so-called obscure principle of “abrogation” in the Quran.

Thus, prior to marshalling the textual evidence, the rational point of view is that the doctrine of abrogation is, indeed, a reality within the conception of Islamic law.

That this makes Islam into a death cult is not the “fault” of formal principles of jurisprudence, but rather, the fault of the tenets of Islam itself…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2008 11:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1587
Joined  2006-10-20

I’m confused.  Allah is supposed to be omniscient and unchanging, but abrogation contradicts these traits.  Did Mohammed misunderstand Allah, or did Mohammed change the rules to fit changed circumstances?  Either way, Allah or his messenger changed his mind.

 Signature 

“All extremists should be killed!” - neighbor’s bumper sticker

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 July 2008 01:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1243
Joined  2006-12-26

The establishment answer is that the Quran was revealed throught the process of “progressive revelation”, i.e, verses were given temporally, in specisfic historical circumstances, on a “need to know” basis.


Others would see this as a clever ploy from Allah’s prophet to always have the ability to go back upon whatever he’d said earlier..

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 July 2008 05:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  885
Joined  2008-01-23
arildno - 31 July 2008 05:53 PM

The establishment answer is that the Quran was revealed throught the process of “progressive revelation”, i.e, verses were given temporally, in specisfic historical circumstances, on a “need to know” basis.


Others would see this as a clever ploy from Allah’s prophet to always have the ability to go back upon whatever he’d said earlier..

Others [skeptics with brains to shallow to follow their own arguments through] see this as a clever ploy… blah, blah, blah.  Ever occur to you that the ‘establishment’s’ explanation is more logical than yours, huh wise guy? 

Your entire premise is that Muslims lie, abrogate, cheat and whatever else have you, to make Islam seem more palatable.  If that were the case, then why would Muslims keep the ‘problematic’ verses in the Qur’an and hadith to begin with?  Why would God and His messenger (peace be upon him) keep as part of the Qur’an, things that would make us believe that they were going back on their word, supposedly to please people?  Surely, people at the time would recognize this and reject the Qur’an altogether, but we don’t see anyone doing so for this particular reason (i.e. the message/messenger is self-serving).  Historically, in early Islam, I don’t believe anyone ever made this claim.  Feel free to show me otherwise.

In the meantime, I have to say again, I think you need help.  It’s not healthy to have such a hate-on for anyone.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2008 01:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1243
Joined  2006-12-26
Jack Shooter - 31 July 2008 09:50 PM
arildno - 31 July 2008 05:53 PM

The establishment answer is that the Quran was revealed throught the process of “progressive revelation”, i.e, verses were given temporally, in specisfic historical circumstances, on a “need to know” basis.


Others would see this as a clever ploy from Allah’s prophet to always have the ability to go back upon whatever he’d said earlier..

Others [skeptics with brains to shallow to follow their own arguments through] see this as a clever ploy… blah, blah, blah.  Ever occur to you that the ‘establishment’s’ explanation is more logical than yours, huh wise guy? 

Your entire premise is that Muslims lie, abrogate, cheat and whatever else have you, to make Islam seem more palatable.  If that were the case, then why would Muslims keep the ‘problematic’ verses in the Qur’an and hadith to begin with?  Why would God and His messenger (peace be upon him) keep as part of the Qur’an, things that would make us believe that they were going back on their word, supposedly to please people?  Surely, people at the time would recognize this and reject the Qur’an altogether, but we don’t see anyone doing so for this particular reason (i.e. the message/messenger is self-serving).  Historically, in early Islam, I don’t believe anyone ever made this claim.  Feel free to show me otherwise.

In the meantime, I have to say again, I think you need help.  It’s not healthy to have such a hate-on for anyone.

As for the doctrine of abrogation, I refer to the Muslim author, Abil-Kasim Hibat-Allah Ibn-Salama Abi-Nasr.

As a summary of the abrogation doctrine, you may read:
http://www.islamreview.com/articles/quransdoctrine.shtml

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 August 2008 05:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  322
Joined  2008-04-17

BTW
lying is OK for muslims according to the hadith:

Volume 3, Book 49, Number 857:
Narrated Um Kulthum bint Uqba:
That she heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar.”

 Signature 

Christian psychopaty:

Bruce Burleson
“.Tell me why it is wrong to rape, steal and kill….
…If I am a slaveholder in Alabama in 1860, why shouldn’t I enslave the niggers, fuck their women, and whip their children when they disobey me????
I’ll tell you why, and it is the ONLY reason why
..”

..he fears gods punishment.

Christians per definition has no moral.
They are governed by fear and fear only.

..and they don’t mind using the N-word.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 August 2008 08:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  885
Joined  2008-01-23
bongobongo - 16 August 2008 09:46 AM

BTW
lying is OK for muslims according to the hadith:

Volume 3, Book 49, Number 857:
Narrated Um Kulthum bint Uqba:
That she heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar.”

You are a late-comer.  Please refer to the earlier discussion on this issue.  There is no such thing as ‘taqiyyah’, not in Sunni Islam anyway.

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed