For eg Beating of wives is not acceptable..but when i question it they would give me answers unacceptable. Similarly women not allowed to marry non muslim men when we question it they say accept what it is written Lastly, of marrying slave women there are no slavery system now so was that verse for that period.who decides that? If that verse was for that period why can other verses be not for a period?
There are different types of questioning.
Firstly, one can question the veracity (truthfulness) of a claim seeking evidence. Did God forbid women from marrying non-Muslim men? He did, and there is much evidence that can be presented. This is the allowed type of questioning, but it is necessary for people to accept the truth after the evidence is presented.
Secondly, one can question something other than the veracity. In modern times, this has usually manifested itself in questioning the ethics of something in light of liberal values.
An example would be: Liberal values indicate that men and women are equal, so anyone who treats them unequally is bad. Islam treats them unequally. How is this acceptable?
This is a type of questioning that is useless and forbidden. It presupposes baseless things (men and women should be treated equally; Why should they be? According to whom?), then questions Islam based on that.
It is not interested in the truth of whether God did command something. It is more interested in trying to force God to command something that conforms to this person's desires.
When scholars say Islam accepts questions, they are talking about the first. Islam accepts and welcomes questions about evidence. How do we know Islam is from God? How do we know this or that command is commanded by God?
No one cares about questions that are not about evidence. Why doesn't Islam treat men and women equally? This is a useless question. Why should it treat them equally in the first place? Because feminism is the flavor of today?
Lastly, of marrying slave women there are no slavery system now so was that verse for that period
The verse is still applicable today even if slaves don't exist right now. If slaves began to exist in the future, it would apply.
The prerequisites for a command to come into play not existing is not the same as the command not existing.
For someone to have a concubine from slaves, slavery needs to exist. But, the concept of having concubines does not cease to exist just because slavery currently does not exist.
I will give an example: Imagine that pork no longer exists in a country. Would it be proper to say the prohibition of pork no longer exists? It wouldn't be proper.
If that verse was for that period why can other verses be not for a period
The verse was not for any time period. It is for all times. If slavery existed right now, the rules of slavery would still apply. Just like that, the rules of marriage apply as long as marriage exists. We do not limit any rules to a certain time period.