[quote]
Originally posted by mbmagsi:
**
You are missing the main point thought. You are Brother and sister until you change the relationship which will be marriage. Come on you need to use your brain.
Okay to make is easier for you, can you tell us what religion you believe in and then we will try and make it easier for you to see the sense of this.
The religion from one to the other (under the condition of been given a BOOK from God/Allah) the rules changed so that you and me as human can live with them. When Adam and Eve were the only beings in the planet then needed childern so that you can be born. So it is LEGAL THEN but as the generation started then it became UNLAWFULL to marry or sleep with your blood SISTER.
Now from your point of view (IF true) then are you planning to marry your own sister. This question is not Direct to anyone but I would like you to use the concept and put yourself in the position and then answer me.**
[/quote]
[quote]
Originally posted by Ahl_e_Sunnah:
** that is wrong...they did not marry their own sister...for cain and abel...god sent down two women...that's how the population grew
**
[/quote]
well, if i wasn't confused b4, now i am. that makes sense tho, is this in the bible or torah?
Bharysh, here's something that was fwded to me about two years ago, it may help clarify some things for you.
*Fwd: Marriage between Adam and Eves children
I have no doubt whatsoever, but these kind a things
come to mind. Whem Adam and Eve bore children, I
assume their children got married among themselves.
Isn’t marrying between brothers and sisters haram in
the Quran?
Can you recommend a good book(s) on Islamic Law
covering every and each aspect of Life? Thank you very
much for the generous work for the sake of Allah.
wa alaikum us-salaam wa-rahmat ullaahi wa-barakaatuh
All Praise be to Allaah.
As long as you are confident in your heart about your
belief, no such insinuations will hurt you (inshaa'
Allaah). If a doubt strikes a believer or something
appears to him as a conflict between different textual
sources of Shari'ah, he must believe that indeed for
such doubts there are true answers and for such
apparent conflicts there are solutions even if he
doesn’t know it or is unable to find the right answer
himself. However, a person should not collect all the
doubts in his heart and worry about the complexities
and leave aside the learning of useful knowledge. This
is because it is incumbent upon a Muslim to learn and
know things which have been clearly described
(Muhkamaat) in Shari'ah so that he may be able to
repel the doubts.
Regarding the question you have asked, it is a known
fact that legislation differs from one Shari'ah to
another, while the principles and beliefs remain the
same in all of them. So, making of portraits was
allowed in the Shari'ah of Sulayman (peace be upon
him) but is prohibited in our Shari'ah. Similarly,
making prostration of salutation was permitted in the
Shari'ah of Yusuf (peace be upon him) but is illegal
in ours. Also, war booty was prohibited for nations
before us but it is completely legal for us. The
Qiblah of people before us used to be towards Bayt
Al-Maqdis, but for us it is towards Ka'bah. In a
similar way, marriage between brothers and sisters was
permitted in the Shari'ah of Adam (peace be upon him)
as opposed to those that came afterwards. The
following is a clarification on the issue by Haafidh
Ibn Katheer, who said:
Allaah allowed Adam (peace be upon him) to marry his
daughters to his sons for necessity. Every couple used
to have a boy and a girl. Hence, he married the girl
of one couple to the boy of another. This is said by
Suddi regarding what has been narrated by Abu Maalik
and Abu Salih, from Ibn ‘Abbas, by Murrah from Ibn
Mas‘ood and by other companions of the Prophet (peace
be upon him) that Adam did not have (in his
grandchildren) a baby boy unless it was accompanied by
a girl, so he married the male of a couple to the
female of another, and the female of a couple to the
male of another.
[quote]
Originally posted by Ahl_e_Sunnah:
** that is wrong...they did not marry their own sister...for cain and abel...god sent down two women...that's how the population grew**
[/quote]
pls tell me more. Who were these 2 women? They were ladies of paradise? Or from Jinn?
[quote]
Originally posted by Mullah_DoPiazza:
** Was incest abolished after your birth?
**
[/quote]
The ignorant keeps BSing around, ha ha ha.
Looks like you have not been to school at all, and lived all your life in some jungle and suddenly some troops rescued you and brought you to a civilized world.
hey kiddy, you need to learn a lot before you come to this forum. if you have hard time learning, ask. otherwise go to the beginning of this thread and start reading again if you didn't understand in 100th attempt.
Gondwanaland or Gondwana
Gondwanaland is the hypothetical former supercontinent in the Southern Hemisphere, which included South America, Africa, peninsular India, Australia, and Antarctica. The name was coined by the Austrian geologist Eduard Suess in reference to the Upper Paleozoic and Mesozoic formations of the Gondwana region of central India, which display typical developments of some of the shared geologic features.
The geologic evidence for a former land connection between the currently separated continents and other areas includes the occurrence of tillites (glacial deposits) of Permo-Carboniferous age (the time boundary between the Carboniferous and Permian periods is 286 million years ago) and similar floras and faunas that are not found in the Northern Hemisphere. The widely distributed seed fern Glossopteris is particularly cited in this regard. The rock strata that contain this evidence are called the Karoo (Karroo) System in South Africa, the Gondwana System in India, and the Santa Catharina System in South America.
The concept that the continents were at one time joined in the geologic past was first set forth in detail by Alfred Wegener, a German meteorologist, in 1912. He envisioned a single great landmass, Pangaea, which supposedly began to separate late in the Triassic Period (245 to 208 million years ago). Subsequent workers distinguished between a southern landmass, Gondwanaland, and Laurasia to the north. It should be noted that much of Wegener's hypothesis of continental drift was based on the apparent geographic "fit" of the bulge of eastern South America and the western coast of Africa. The geologic evidence cited earlier was provided by subsequent investigators.
The idea of Gondwanaland languished for many years, except among scientists in countries of the Southern Hemisphere, until the 1960s, when evidence of sea-floor spreading from the loci of oceanic ridges proved that the ocean basins are not permanent global features and vindicated Wegener's hypothesis of continental drift. Although the term Gondwanaland does not appear in the modern literature with great frequency, the concept of continental drift and former continental connections is widely accepted.
There is no end to this discussion. Please keep religion and science separate.
Religion is based on personal beliefs, which no one else should question or analyse.
Science is based on evidence and logic. Analysis, criticism and alternative hypotheses are welcome and needed, because it get us closer to the scientific truths.
In all universities there are separate departments. e.g. Religious studies, Anthropology, Paleontology, etc.
Has any one ever seen in any text book on Anthropology and Paleontology that says...
** "The current view on the origin of man as a species, based on the skeletical evidence and carbon dating, is that man evolved in ....(place).. .. million years ago. However Bibilical studies show that Adam ane Eve lived in what is now ......(place)..... million years ago. But Hindu scholars have documentary evidence in their religious books that ..... And let us not forget the Buddist literature. However the Koram syas.... and the American Indian folk lore says.... **
Scientifc books and journals never mention religion. Religious books dont mention anything about physical skeletal evidence and carbon dating etc.
Religion and Science are two mutually exclusive schools of thought. Two different universes , two different languages. Lets keep it that way.
[This message has been edited by Tanhaa (edited July 30, 2001).]
The land where the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is situated today had been a seat of world’s leading Civilizations from the time immemorial. There is plenty of evidence from the pre-historic and historic period to support this argument, e.g. fossil jaws of apes, circa 14 millions years old found from Pothohar. They belong to a species named “Sivapithecus Pakininsis”, said to be the ancestor of Man. A 2 million years old earliest stone hand axe. Now on display in Islamabad Museum, Islamabad. http://www.heritage.gov.pk/culture.heri-1.1.html
Mr Tanhaa is right. At this age, science is not mature enough, and religion does not provide with the details science is looking for (doing research). So many facts / hypothesis have changed within this century. What once seemed ‘impossible’ in science several years/decades ago is now used today.
Let the science grow and mature and see what it says about the creation of universe.
ofcourse science cant explain everything
that does not mean we have to oppose
sceintific findings. you need religen for moral and spiritual needs but for material world you need science. religen you have choice science we all agree.