Al-Daleel

This study concludes that the atheistic theories in general depend on insufficient reasons, and are weak. In most cases, they would invite truthful scholars to relinquish these ideas once they realise how weak these arguments are, and they look with a conscious eye to the arguments of the other side.
Antony Flew was regarded as the first atheist philosopher in the English world, and among the scholars who wanted to reach to reality. He walked in the guidance of evidence until he surpassed the darkness of atheism. He held onto the methodology of evidence, and not its market or amalgamating.
In this study I have explained the most important reasons that led Flew to atheism, and then the most important reasons that took him to believe. I then analytically discussed the two stages, with the reasons and results.

"This article addresses the dispute of freedom and religious obligations, and the relation between them, being said that it is based on a contradiction. The basis of this seeming conflict is to object the status of religion and damage its image in order to eliminate religion from the scope of life, in it being a difficult issue in our lives. This is presented for the purpose of humans being able to live far from restrictions and to live with freedom and not being obliged to be burdened with duties, especially when freedom is a fundamental principle that must precede everything else.
This article discusses the issue of freedom from a religious perspective, and also from a non-religious perspective adopted by humanism, which promotes the centralisation of humans in life. I will explain the epistemic principles of freedom according to both trends, and then explain the different outcomes for both of them. The outcome of this study is that religion in its principle is based on freedom and choice, and rejection of creational and legislative compulsion in certain cases, even though it involves certain obligations and rulings that come via choice and conscious selection. It is not external to it, and it is for achieving spiritual freedom and human interests for this world and for the hereafter.

"The dominating methodology among Muslim scholars, especially in Sunni circles, is the necessity of adhering to religious texts (the Quran and hadith) in the area of religious teachings, in particular theology, and prohibiting the interference of reason in this area. This textual trend comes from the claim of the purity of knowledge that emerges from texts, which leads to the role of human intellect being useless or negative.
This paper starts by sketching a precise and referenced image of this theory in religious teachings, especially in knowing God, and relies on the words of textualists themselves. We then aim at explaining the main arguments against this view, with there are at least three critiques directed at them.
The first: The main claim of this view opposes religious text itself, because there are numerous religious texts that refer to the intellect having a primary role in religious knowledge.
The second: Destablising the position of reason does not strengthen transmitted (al-naqli) evidence. Rather, relying on transmitted evidence without referring to rational principles is nothing but building on weak foundations.
The third: Abandoning reason will not lead to an increase in the purity of religious teachings. Rather, such a claim from a scholar is elevating the level of human understanding and interpreting of revelation to be revelation itself.

The hermeneutic theory is regarded as old theory that was used since the era of Plato, and it deals with “explaining and removing ambiguity from a subject”. It is also a contemporary theory where many Western thinkers have tried to involve it in understanding religious texts and read these texts in the best way. This theory has been transferred to Islamic societies via certain Arab thinkers who underwent their academic studies in Western institutes and were influenced by their modernist thoughts over there. This is why they attempted to apply this theory on Islamic thought, through using hermeneutics in reading Quranic and hadith texts. In this study I have focused on the most important elements of this theory and its critiques, based on scientific foundations, and refuted them, emphasising on its inability in understanding Islamic texts.

Numerous studies have been made about the topic of Islamisation, where some see it as life, progress and reform, whereas others are convinced that it is nothing but destruction, violence, extremism and killing. Each of these two directions have their stated arguments and background that they rely on. This paper aims at establishing that Islam has the ability to manage the life of an individual and society on metaphysical and logical foundations, and based on clear human principles. The ambiguity in this article is regarding the purport of Islamisation as far as its meaning or its application. This study focuses on revealing the cases of Islamisation that the Ijtihad of Islamic scholars have established, through their experiences in their lives, and throughout history. According to our report, this can be summarised in the category of text, intellectuality and rationality, limited it from the aspect of conceptualisation and indication. There is also an emphasis on the benefits that come from Islamisation, based on this combination, like opening towards change, inviting unity, proximity, that intellectuality and rationality is the substance of religion, and so on. The approach this article used was analytical, with some descriptive explanations, and also relying on analysis generally common among Muslims.

The dominating methodology among Muslim scholars, especially in Sunni circles, is the necessity of adhering to religious texts the Quran and hadith in the area of religious teachings, in particular theology, and prohibiting the interference of reason in this area. This textual trend comes from the claim of the purity of knowledge that emerges from texts, which leads to the role of human intellect being useless or negative. This paper starts by sketching a precise and referenced image of this theory in religious teachings, especially in knowing God, and relies on the words of textualists themselves. We then aim at explaining the main arguments against this view, with there are at least three critiques directed at them. The first: The main claim of this view opposes religious text itself, because there are numerous religious texts that refer to the intellect having a primary role in religious knowledge. The second: Destablising the position of reason does not strengthen transmitted (al-naqli) evidence. Rather, relying on transmitted evidence without referring to rational principles is nothing but building on weak foundations. The third: Abandoning reason will not lead to an increase in the purity of religious teachings. Rather, such a claim from a scholar is elevating the level of human understanding and interpreting of revelation to be revelation itself.

After forming a correct concept of the essence of the discretionary area (mantaqah al-faragh) in Islamic law, there is a research problem in the possibility of whether God the Creator who perceives the interests of creation and is the legislator of laws based on these interests has left a large area of life issues in different aspects and not address laws for them within the Sharia law. In reality, this topic is related to the acts of God and what He has abandoned, and therefore it falls within the subject of theology, if we were to distinguish theological discussions from other topics based on this criteria. After the possibility of conceptualizing the discretionary area, whether in authoritative governmental laws, or in jurisprudence and legislation itself, the topic is established in its occurrence. In the level of occurrence, it has said that there are problems related to it, like it contradicts what God has clearly said in His Book, that He has completed religion, and this completion is clear in the Sharia covering all realities of life, so there is no place for the discretionary area. As for what has been said that it would lead to the common rectification (taswib), and that is impossible.
This study firstly presents a clear picture of the essence of the discretionary area and its types, and then presents these misconceptions and whether they are real problems or not?

Language of religion is among the primary topics of philosophy of religion. The issues discussed in language of religion centralizes on two fundamental points: the first is the issues that are related to the linguistic foundation of religion, and whether religious language has an epistemic indication and represents a reality, or is it just symbolic and mythological language that lacks any epistemic content and does not represent reality. Rather, it has other duties, like explaining emotions and feelings? There are scientific schools and theories that believe that religious language does not represent reality and does reflect it, and this is from the “logical positivism school”, the “eschatological verifiable theory”, the game of language theory, the principle of verification theory, the symbolic language theory, and others.
Opposite to this are scientific schools that believe that the language of religion is a real language that has epistemic indications and do represent reality, where most Islamic scientific schools believe in this, and some Western schools, like the theory of “analogy” the theory of “anthropomorphism,” the theory of “univocality,” and others.
The second point is the issues related to explaining and analysing the theological propositions, and they are propositions where the subject is “God” and the predicate is “Perfect Attributes”. This discussion is based on the attributes shared between the Creator and the created, like knowledge, power, speech, will, etc., and how they are explained in line with the magnitude of Almighty God and His simple existence.
In this paper we aim at studying both of these points through presenting the common theories and critiquing them based on the rational-analytical approach.