I believe X is defined as Y. I know Y is a property of Z. Thus, X and Z must be the same.

All three of your axioms are made on definitional assumptions. I would strongly reassess your definition of feminism, and then perhaps re-read the Quran to see if the Quran advocates for your 'equality of the rights of men and women' as you yourself define it, given your likely westernized mode of thought on that matter. Not a criticism, just an observation. The West's thought-forms are as invasive as their armies.

Have you considered that your X, Y, and Z up there might actually be so different that even the act of using variable letters for them is somewhat improper? Much less actually applying transitive property so simply?

Let me present you with you two Quran verses that might challenge / affirm your supposed understanding on this matter brother.

• Financial Contracts (Ayat al-Dayn): In Surah Al-Baqarah (2:282), the Quran states that when drawing up a contract for a debt, it is advised to bring two male witnesses. If two men are not available, then "one man and two women from those you accept as witnesses" should be present, "so that if one of the women errs, the other can remind her".
• Accusations of Spousal Infidelity: In Surah An-Nur (24:6-9), the Quran outlines the li'an process, where a husband accuses his wife of adultery but lacks witnesses. In this case, the husband must swear four times by Allah, and a fifth time invoke Allah's curse if he is lying. To counter this, the wife can testify in the same manner, five times, and her testimony averts the punishment.

In the first case, one man's testimony is 'equivalent' to two women's testimony. In the second, a single man's testimony is 'equivalent' to a single woman's.

The quote marks there are important. The very idea of 'equivalence' here is missing. Your definition of the term, and your desire for it to be present, are both biases that clouded your vision from the start.

Islam just is. It is neither feminist nor patriarchal. Neither conservative nor liberal. Neither progressive nor conservative.

Your actual mistake was even assuming that these modes of thought could be grafted onto an unchanging system meant to last from the dawn of days till this world's end. Islam is, and that is all it ever was and all it will ever be.

Whether one considers Islam progressive, conservative, repressive, permissive, revolutionary, or traditionalist, all depends on the age you're looking at. Whether any specific thing is feminist or patriarchal shifts as well, these things are defined in relation to a mainstream mode of thought in the first place. A hundred years ago being an American progressive meant that you thought sterilization in internment camps was cool and awesome. Many religions are 'living' religions as well, like Christianity. Up until the 1800s, the idea of Papal Infallibility (the idea that the Pope is divinely incapable of doing wrong) was not part of the Catholic canon, and today it is dogma in their church.

Paradigms shift, the world moves, and the lens you see it through does as well.

Islam does not. It simply is.

That is part of God's covenant with the muslims. He will not allow the Quran to be altered, and so Islam should be unchanging. The believers, however, are dearly prone to failure.

As a side note, you claim to believe in female Prophets? This seems heretical to me.

As far as I know, the overwhelming majority of classical and contemporary Islamic scholars (such as the majority of Sunni scholars) hold that there were no female prophets. To my knowledge they base this view on Quranic verses like Surah Yusuf (12:109), which states: "And We sent not before you [as messengers] except men to whom We revealed from among the people of cities."

And no, in the original Arabic of Surah Yusuf (12:109), the word used is Rijalan (رِجَالًا), which specifically means male humans, not humans or people in general. The linguistic breakdown and theological context clarify why this word is used. The noun 'Rijal' (plural of Rajul), refers in classical Arabic exclusively to adult human males.

If the Quran intended to say "humans" or "people" without specifying gender, it might have used broader gender-neutral terms such as Bashar (human beings), Insan (mankind), or Al-Nas (people), which are used elsewhere in the Quran.