WikiIslam:Discussions/Visitor Inquiries: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Undo revision 113625 by 107.216.221.133 (talk) - moved)
(8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 467: Line 467:
Has anybody ever combined the Qur'an, Hadith, and Ishaq/Tabari into a single, chronologically ordered document?
Has anybody ever combined the Qur'an, Hadith, and Ishaq/Tabari into a single, chronologically ordered document?
: As far as I know it hasnt been done. I think the problem is that there's no knowledge of what happened when, so there could be a lot of variation and no one could say that their version of events is right. Maybe if someone only used important events for which they definitely knew the dates they could try. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 17:12, 18 August 2015 (PDT)--[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 17:12, 18 August 2015 (PDT)
: As far as I know it hasnt been done. I think the problem is that there's no knowledge of what happened when, so there could be a lot of variation and no one could say that their version of events is right. Maybe if someone only used important events for which they definitely knew the dates they could try. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 17:12, 18 August 2015 (PDT)--[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 17:12, 18 August 2015 (PDT)
== What about more "responses to apologists" ? ==
I am writing this as a confused muslim. You know,there are lots of islamic websites,they have thousands of "rebuttals to islamic critics" and just a few anti islamic ones against them.So when muslims come across an argument against islam, they think "well,im sure someone has already refutted this,so lets not worry about it." It seems like that "Critics of islam have all said what is to be said against islam,but apologists refutted them all,so there is nothing left to say." Probably that is what apologists think or try to prove.Considering these,I have a suggestion.I think you should have more "responses to apologists",so that we,as readers,can decide more reasonably which side is more plausible and you can be more "convincing" that way.Thank you.
:I fully agree these sections are very important especially for often debated topics. See [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Frequently_Asked_Questions#Can_someone_do_XYZ.2C_create.2Fedit_an_article_for_me.3F this] about requests like this. [[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 18:30, 2 February 2016 (EST)
== On the subject of Islam and Chess ==
The Wikislam entry is deceptive and innaccurate.
"Many worried chess would be banned by the "Qur'an" an Islamic law banning gambling. Chess become very popular after their theologians decided that chess playing wasn't contrary to the teachings of Mohammed. This decision took about 100 years and illustrates the curious power of a simple game. After the official decision that there was no harm in chess, the Moslems created a greatly detailed literature about it."
The Islamic prophet Mohammed did not say Chess was forbidden, a ccording to a Hadith (not Qu'ran) he is said to have compared dice to eating pork, because it was gambling.
Not Chess. The Hadiths are not official Islamic doctrine.
Furthermore, Chess was actually invented by the Moors in Spain, earlier versions bore little resemblance to the present game as we know it.
There are no real pre-Islamic artifacts attributable to "Chess" just as there is no evidence of the Kingdom of someone named "David".
In fact, 15th to 17th century Christians said the same thing about the game of chess as Muslims, that it is harmless unless it consumes an inordinate amount of one's time.
Also, there is no evidence that Zoroastrians rather tham Muslims developed the game in early Persia.
I have to say, I read wikislam and get the overwhelming impression that, rather than a scholarly site meant to serve as a source of accurate info on Islam, that it is a polemic endeavor, a hostile, agenda-driven vehicle...not just in the various glaring innaccuracies, but in the general tone and often unscholarly asides.
I am not a Muslim, but I consider it churlish to falsely represent a religion in a negative way. It's un-American. And most people would agree with me.
== ALL LINKS TO VERSES @ usc.edu ARE DEAD ==
ALL LINKS TO VERSES @ usc.edu ARE DEAD. Either a new site must be found, or a possible solution might be to link to an archived version of the pages through one (or more) of the following:
http://'''webcache.googleusercontent.com'''/search?q=cache: [original URL]
https://'''web.archive.org'''/web/*/ [original URL]
http://'''archive.is'''/ [original URL]
[[User:Yaakovaryeh|Yaakovaryeh]] ([[User talk:Yaakovaryeh|talk]]) 17:08, 18 October 2016 (EDT)
== Update QuranX.com links ==
Please update HTTP links to QuranX.com to HTTPS.
:Thanks for the suggestion (the wikiislam site itself was recently moved to https too). This has now been done. The relevant templates are all included on https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Category:Islamic_text_templates [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 16:23, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Editors, em-bypass-2, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
2,743

edits

Navigation menu