The thing is, I know. But it is not working for some reason.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The thing is, I know. But it is not working for some reason.
I agree. my wife is not from my country so I spend a lot of time explaining myself.It's a colloquialism - not meant to be interpreted that FearGod is Shad's literal flesh & blood offspring. In this context 'son' is used in the same way as 'mate', 'pal', 'buddy', 'chum', or 'friend'. I'm not entirely sure why it's used in this way but that is the context.
No wonder people say English is a hard language.
She cant. I am much faster runner than she is.If she beat you ?
Good point.If a Muslim woman slept with another man then it'll be divorced immediately, it isn't like in the west that some men may accept and forgive
their wives if slept with other men, For Aisha it was just rumors, they have already accused Virgin Mary of having sex with a Roman soldier.
Here in the USA domestic violence laws apply to both husband and wife which I think is good. But you will see confused looks on some womens faces when they get arrested for assaulting their husband. Followed by the comment "but I'm a woman". Seriously though lets keep our hands to ourselves and just not hit each other.The funny thing is the other way around is not part of this law
I did not give any translation of the word or the context of the verse in which it has been used. I was just viewing the arguments given by friends Shad and FearGod. I gave all the verses from Quran where the word has been used and Shad chose from them the ones they suited him and ignored the verses that had a leaning towards the point of view of FearGod. Right?Irrelevant as the context and modification of the word based on personal interaction show it is about striking someone. Modification supposed by your own sources. Modification support by Lane's Lexicon. You are ignoring the specific verse and meaning in favor a different verse with a more positive definition. Remember how you mention context all the time? Well you are doing it wrong. Follow your own advice.
I think high heels should be required to register as weapon.
Those Religions which thrived in the Middle East before Islam which are now oppressed:
- Christianity
- Zoroastrianism
- Judaism
- Various forms of Paganism
Last, Bahai is struggling to make a niche for itself because Islamic "justice" keeps sentencing them to death and oppressing them. They shut down their schools and other such places.
How many of these groups live in peace in Muslim lands?
How many Churches, Synagogues and other temples exist in, say, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan? Either not many or none, and none are allowed to be built anew and the current ones are not allowed to be repaired.
Second, jizyah ..........Here is the Qur'anic ayah about jizyah:
Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgement of superiority and they are in a state of subjection [Quran 9:29]
We have to pay a tax (jizyah) and be in "subjection" or else the Muslims will KILL us.......
I think high heels should be required to register as weapon
I checked with Google:Where is the details of beating ? Is it slapping, boxing, pulling hair, biting, kicking..etc
For how long man should beat his wife, till she feels fainting or till she says i love you.
How many times he should beat her, once a day, twice a day.... ?
First he should talk with her then to leave her alone then he should come back to box her face, the last one makes sense.
Thank you for a somewhat reasonable answer.
That said, can you honestly say that Islam is a peaceful religion, given its well known history? It is completely disingenuous to say it is a "religion of peace". I do agree however that if one says that "Islam is a religion of peace" they are either ignorant, disingenuous or outright lying. It would be quite truthful to say that "Islam if a religion of complete submission."
If you buy into the theology, you submit to Allah. If you do not buy into the theology you submit to Muslim rule and being a 2nd class citizen.Submission to whom ?
But Shad says FearGod is not his friend?It's a colloquialism - not meant to be interpreted that FearGod is Shad's literal flesh & blood offspring. In this context 'son' is used in the same way as 'mate', 'pal', 'buddy', 'chum', or 'friend'. I'm not entirely sure why it's used in this way but that is the context.
No wonder people say English is a hard language.
And if you don't pay jizyah when you're capable Muslims are permitted to attack you & terrify you until start paying
On the surface this sounds fine, but what is overlooked is that the so-called enemies of Islam are likely friends who would seek to free you from your bondage. One is essentially paying for their own captivity.Jizya is just, because you get something for it. You can live in a muslim state and enjoying military protection from enemies, without joining the military. So actually you are paying the military to protect you. You get something of real value for your money therefore it is just. It is "protection money", but the good kind. Not the mafia kind of protection money.
It makes sense when you put it that way.By your logic, every tax is mafia protection money because any state will fight and terrify you until you pay your taxes.
Mafia protection money is not just, because you get nothing for it really.
Any tax is just, because you get something for it (like better schools)
Jizya is just, because you get something for it. You can live in a muslim state and enjoying military protection from enemies, without joining the military. So actually you are paying the military to protect you. You get something of real value for your money therefore it is just. It is "protection money", but the good kind. Not the mafia kind of protection money.
It only makes sense on a very superficial level.It makes sense when you put it that way.
Keep in mind, I have very limited knowledge of this. I was just saying that the way raph explained it ,it made more sense. If I moved to a Muslim country to live there long term and was required to pay a tax in exchange for not serving in the military I could accept that. If I were paying a tax simply for not being a Muslim I would think that pretty ridiculous. So which is it? I don't know. But at the same time the old saying "when in Rome, do as the Romans do" applies here. If I knew this was their custom and did not agree with it I just wouldn't move there. Now at the same time, the non-Muslims from that area is another thing altogether.It only makes sense on a very superficial level.
Think about it for just a second. You are a captive of a Muslim army. You are paying for "protection" by that army against enemies of that army. Those enemies are quite likely your friends. Get it?