Islam isnt that bad.

Islam

I actually do not see any valid reasons to criticise the rules islam has preached.Although i see the problems that could arise from those teachings.I will try to refrain from "tHOse ArENt rEal mUSlIMs" type defenses.Its also worth mention that i havent read any translations of the Quran.Feel free to correct this post.

Basically i think the prophet(sm)s laws did more good than harm nominally at least.I think his greatest contribution was being a conqueror and unifier like genghis khan,napoleon,caesar,qin shi huangdi, alexander,charlamagne or cyrus(although he had less military capability).All these guys were "deified" or "idolised" by their cultures.What sets islam apart is it had the most positive impact on morality and law by our modern standards which i will explain below:

1)Charity:I doubt i need to bring up islams state mandated charity initiatives.Of course one could argue that the funds went towards imperialism instead of philanthropy but one guy in arabia cant do more than just spreading a good ideology in his life.

2)Womens rights:The weakest point i can make here.Realistically islams treatment of women is pretty good.In past cultures,just having the nominal right to divorce and inheritance is considered radical for women.Of course ideas of an age old patriarchy had made its way into sciences too.Most cultures viewed women as lesser animals than human because an agrarian warlike society isnt what women are gonna thrive in.Nietszche even argued that womens meaning in life was created by men.Burqas are bad tho as it hinders basic mobility.Idk if it was islamic protocol or existing social law that admittedly wouldnt exist without the arab conquests as i havent read the Quran.Speaking of conquest...

3)Slave rights:The customs of older cultures and in particular arabias about concubinage is pretty great once the post muhammad(sm) society got established.These customs werent invented by islam as most cultures except greece and rome had a "prove yourself" attitude towards slaves and slave children.The islamic society however nominally gave female slaves the same status concubines would have had.The whole manumission of "mother and child after master dies" and "no pimping" nominally removes the problems slavery entails.Of course it wasnt followed everywhere and power always breeds abuse.But if prophet(sm) wanted to actually do something good,his best choice would have been to spread these ideas he didnt invent.

The main criticism is why prophet(sm) wasnt a saintly figure like buddha or jesus.Id argue that the reason is because outside of the hadith,nothing "particularly meaningful" is mythologized about his views.Ultimately as a historical figure the ideas he preached explained above became "the law of the land" in a large part of the world.These specific laws were more in line with our current morality today and it wouldnt exist without arab conquests.One could argue im having the PT Barnum episode rn but idk.

Also slavery exists because the other option is killing the losers in a war.You want land and there is people/property living there.So you take the property instead of killing it for no reason.If you create rights to try and prevent abuse of that property then that is the most good a single man or culture could do.Being a saintly ascetic like buddha or jesus isnt the best course to solve these problems rather than fully creating your own society.

I also believe the point of religion is to inspire people.The quote from batman begins-

"People need dramatic examples to shake them oit of apathy."

Thats why religions dont focus on accurate facts but rather tall tales.Islam amd judaism focus more on laws over cool myths.I think for being the man who spread these laws and unified his country,muhammad(sm) gets too little credit both by people willingly or unwillingly ignoring those efforts in his lifes context.IMO he should be seen in the same vein as augustus had he been deified himself as he fits an archetypal ubermensch who creates his and society's purpose and protocol.

in DebateReligionby Limp_Tiger_2867

34%

14d

View all comments

Faith_OverFear

10d

Women’s rights? Are you being sarcastic?

The quran says men can beat their wives and grape captured women

LilDickGirlV2

first where does it say that they can grape captured women.

Second Surah An-Nisa (4:34) has often been misunderstood/misinterpreted. you have to look at the context of the verse and the overall teachings of Islam regarding the treatment of women:

1.  Context and Steps: The verse outlines a series of steps to address marital discord, emphasizing communication and patience. Now Regarding “beat them”

Meaning of “Beat”

• The word “beat” (Arabic: “idribuhunna”) has been the subject of extensive interpretation. Many scholars argue that it implies a symbolic, non-violent gesture. • The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself provided guidance on this issue, emphasizing that any physical correction must not cause harm. Some scholars even translate it as “leave them” or “separate from them.”
1. Prophet Muhammad’s Example: The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) never physically harmed his wives and always treated them with the utmost respect and kindness. He explicitly discouraged harming women and said, “The best of you are those who are best to their wives” (Tirmidhi). And we strive to be as similar to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as possible.
2. Broader Teachings: Islam consistently promotes the protection and respectful treatment of women. Verses like Surah An-Nisa (4:19) instruct men to live with their wives in kindness and not to harm them. There’s so many verses in the Quran that say to protect and respect women.

By considering the broader context, the example set by the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and the overarching principles of justice and compassion in Islam, it becomes clear that Surah An-Nisa (4:34) does not permit domestic violence but rather encourages resolving conflicts with patience and respect.