What are the mistakes Muslims do when informing others about Islam?

[Meow Mix]

Of course it is no coincidence that it was during this golden age that the principles of Islam were most rigorously enacted.

From what I understood when I was researching the topic a lot of the Golden Age had to do with allowing Greek ideas into the culture and expounding on them, which was later disallowed for being non-Islamic. What do you mean by "most rigorously enacted," because it seems to me that the Islamic Golden Age was golden because it was less dogmatic?

 

[Bismillah]

What about my woods example, say a couple is in the woods and comes by a waterfall and decides to consumate their love -- and it just SO happens that another group of people (against many odds) is walking through the same woods.

A couple? You mean a married man and a married wife who are engaging in an act of adultery? They want to consummate their love? Why not get a divorce? Why do such reprehensible things in public? Why be proud of such a shameful and disgusting act?

Is it righteous to put them to death, on top of that?

Unabashed people who pursue such things in public, I cannot even comprehend what they are thinking. Honestly it defies my mind to imagine the state of mind of such a person.

Woe to anyone who submits themselves to such evil!

I would think it is more evil to live in a society that perpetuates and even goes so far as to romanticize the topic.

You make murdering sound like taking the trash out in a cheery 50's American nuclear family neighborhood.

And you make adultery sound like hugging your best friend?

 

[Meow Mix]

A couple? You mean a married man and a married wife who are engaging in an act of adultery? They want to consummate their love? Why not get a divorce? Why do such reprehensible things in public? Why be proud of such a shameful and disgusting act?

Unabashed people who pursue such things in public, I cannot even comprehend what they are thinking. Honestly it defies my mind to imagine the state of mind of such a person.

I would think it is more evil to live in a society that perpetuates and even goes so far as to romanticize the topic.



And you make adultery sound like hugging your best friend?

Maybe I'm confused, I didn't know the topic involved adultery but just sex (and at one point homosexuality was mentioned).

Is homosexuality considered adultery, for one?

Two, I'd still think that stoning is still outrageously disproportionately far from deserving a stoning. Deserving a divorce and public disgrace maybe ("Don't date this guy/girl, he/she is a cheater!") but not DEATH. That's just ridiculous. (Also, IMO, evil.)

 

[Bismillah]

From what I understood when I was researching the topic a lot of the Golden Age had to do with allowing Greek ideas into the culture and expounding on them, which was later disallowed for being non-Islamic. What do you mean by "most rigorously enacted," because it seems to me that the Islamic Golden Age was golden because it was less dogmatic?

In every way shape and form it was more Islamic society. It was only after nationalistic rivalries established emirates, which went against the grain of Islam, Islamic scholars were brought into the fold of government which bribed and corrupted their neutrality, and ostentatious rulers gave up their covenant with the people to form oppressive governments that essentially discarded the Ummah.

The dogmatism was a reflex to the external invasions of European soldiers and Mongols and the waning of Islamic unity and power. This also furthered the cracks between the Sunnis and Shias, such as the and contributed to a regression in Islamic thought.

 

[Badran]

No, the case of adultery between two unmarried person results in 100 lashing and in that context alone.

Thats not what the verse says Abibi. It has specified nothing, its in general. The only reason to take it like this is due to the existence of supposed Hadiths that addresses married couples which leads to the assumption that the Quran is only talking about unmarried couples. If you don't trust my word for it, here is some Tafsir sites for Ibn Kathir. You will note the following. That he interprets it to mean either married or unmarried (and rightly so). Then Only when he goes on to add the supposed Hadiths to the perspective, he talks about the other supposed punishments.

Quran Surah (Sura) Nur (Noor) Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Arabic English, HTMl, PDF, with Recitation By Said Al Ghamdi MP3, Free Download

Tafsir Ibn Kathir - Quran Tafsir - The Explanation of the Prescribed Punishment for Zina (Illicit Sex)

but there are if they engage in the intimate details of homosexuality in public, which stem from the punishment of adultery in public.

Which (if we do so) should be stemmed from the punishment said in the Quran.

What do you mean worse than murder? Are you aware that a person who commits a murder may be killed in the same fashion with which he deposed of his victims?

Lets suppose a man shoots another man in the head. Whats his penalty? Instant death correct?

Now, another man has sex with another women while being married to another women. That is of course a horrible thing, but how in the world can his punishment be any way near that of a murderer, let alone much worse?

No, it quite clearly is your word and your own diverging interpretation. For the Qur'an does not contradict this in any way, merely specifies for the case of adultery of unmarried individuals.

And furthermore, the Hadith that you are pointing out that have "erred" include those of Umar (R.A) and recorded enforcement of this punishment by the Prophet himself. So I am not quite sure how you see it fit that your logic takes supreme to the actions of the Prophet and the recording of the Prophet's companion.

I never said anything about my logic being supreme to that of the prophet (pbuh) and his companions. What i'm saying is he is reported to have supposedly done that.

I'm not sure where you find it as inexcusable but that is one of the biggest transgressions in Islam and I could care less what secular thought says on the matter.

Abibi, please don't misunderstand me. I have not undermined anything. What i'm saying is quite simple. Bad as it is, this act can not deserve this punishment, based on what i've told you. Please, just remind yourself the same way you're reminding yourself of how awful it is to cheat on your wife, about what it means to murder a person, and then consider the difference.

 

[Bismillah]

Is homosexuality considered adultery, for one?

Two, I'd still think that stoning is still outrageously disproportionately far from deserving a stoning. Deserving a divorce and public disgrace maybe ("Don't date this guy/girl, he/she is a cheater!") but not DEATH. That's just ridiculous. (Also, IMO, evil.)

Depending on whether they are married or not.

Ok you may think so, don't become a Muslim?

 

[kai]

Of course it is no coincidence that it was during this golden age that the principles of Islam were most rigorously enacted.

indeed just as in Rome at the height of Empire, Roman principles were most rigorously enacted over the barbarians they subjugated.

 

[Bismillah]

Then Only when he goes on to add the supposed Hadiths to the perspective, he talks about the other supposed punishments.

Why is it that you are so easily discarding sound Hadiths made by the most trustworthy of people?

Which (if we do so) should be stemmed from the punishment said in the Quran.

In the case that they are unmarried.

Now, another man has sex with another women while being married to another women. That is of course a horrible thing, but how in the world can his punishment be any way near that of a murderer, let alone much worse?

The punishment is murder by stoning, by which no one knows who was the person to kill the offender. A firing squad would serve the same purpose which would rule your qualm out correct?

Then again, it is permissible to slay a murderer in the manner that he killed his victim. That does not mean it is confined to it.

What i'm saying is he is reported to have supposedly done that.

For what reason do you doubt the message of Umar (R.A)?

cheat on your wife, about what it means to murder a person, and then consider the difference.

It's not just cheating on your wife. It is, in essence, cutting her and the rest of your family from your material support. It is shaming them and ruining their future and the tentative bonds that hold the family together. It is in short not just taking the life of one victim but ruining the lives of many victims.

 

[Bismillah]

indeed just as in Rome at the height of Empire, Roman principles were most rigorously enacted over the barbarians they subjugated.

I'm not sure what Roman principles have to do with anything nor the fact that returning to our Islamic roots is the only way to diffuse the trouble in today's countries.

 

[Badran]

Why is it that you are so easily discarding sound Hadiths made by the most trustworthy of people?

It's not easy at all Abibi, i've struggled for a long time with these things. The Quran mentions zina in general, and gives a punishment for it. Then a supposed Hadith proposes a completely illogical, unfair and unfitting punishment for this act. Hadiths which all the work surrounding it was done by human who can make mistakes. There is simply no reason to take this verse to be meaning unmarried couples except based on these Hadiths.

In the case that they are unmarried.

That would be again based on the assumption that the verse is talking about unmarried couples.

The punishment is murder by stoning, by which no one knows who was the person to kill the offender. A firing squad would serve the same purpose which would rule your qualm out correct?

IT wouldn't, and here is why. Two reasons:

1) Firing squad will result in him dying in a matter of seconds. While in stoning, it sure might take a while. You're trying to kill a person by throwing stones at him.

2) Even if we supposed its the exact same punishment, it still doesn't change much. Because such two acts quite simply can't have the same punishment.

For what reason do you doubt the message of Umar (R.A)?

You mean whats reported on Umar's behalf that he supposedly said there was a verse and then removed?

If so there's plenty of reasons:

1) If there was such verse. and then it was removed, it quite simply means it no longer applies.

2) There is no evidence of such verse ever existing.

3) There is no evidence that this concept of totally removing verses from the quran is actually true.

It's not just cheating on your wife. It is, in essence, cutting her and the rest of your family from your material support. It is shaming them and ruining their future and the tentative bonds that hold the family together. It is in short not just taking the life of one victim but ruining the lives of many victims.

I totally understand what you're saying Abibi, but think about it its still not the same. They are alive, wounded surely, but alive and fully capable of picking up their lives. Also, in lots of cases when a spouse makes this mistake, the act is forgiven and the couple move on with their lives, and they manage to get over it.

 

[gnostic]

No need to tell you that you are right:

Verses 24-2,3 says: "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication flog each of them with 100 stripes." “The adulterer shall not marry save an adultress, and the adultress shall not marry save an adulterer or an idolater All that is forbidden unto believers

The biggest problem (other than the punishment of flogging) with these verses is that it doesn't take into account they are adulterer or adulteress. If he or she, or both, are already married, then how could they possibly marry each other, unless they (one or the other or both) divorce their current partners.

It is senseless set of instruction.

 

[Meow Mix]

Depending on whether they are married or not.

Ok you may think so, don't become a Muslim?

Is it "adultery" if people have premarital sex (but in which said sex isn't cheating on someone, the couple simply isn't married)? Most homosexuals can't legally marry, so that's a pressing concern.

It's more than me not becoming a Muslim. Besides, I don't think being Muslim is a problem; it's allowing and agreeing with evil that's the problem. As far as I can see, Badran and other Muslims don't have evil views about murdering people so clearly the issue isn't Islam -- just some evil ways to practice it.

The only thing that keeps evil from succeeding is for good people to do nothing, so if a group of people are interpreting something in a way that lets them murder people so callously (be it religion or politics or whatever, this interpretation of Islam included) it isn't just a matter of people deciding "Oh I don't want any part of that." For instance I'm glad Hitler was defeated and his evil put to an end. I'd be glad if anyone who murdered people for mere adultery were defeated, too. Such reckless evil doesn't belong in a world of moral human beings.

Don't mistake me for fostering adultery or being gentle on it. It should be punished -- it is intself a cruel thing to do. Murder, however, is NOT the answer anymore than chopping off a hand is the answer to petty theft. That's ridiculous and barbaric.

 

[Bismillah]

If he or she, or both, are already married, then how could they possibly marry each other, unless they (one or the other or both) divorce their current partners.

Except zina can also be between two people who are unmarried. Which is the interpretation of this verse, between two unmarried people who commit to sexual relations.

 

[Bismillah]

it is intself a cruel thing to do. Murder, however, is NOT the answer anymore than chopping off a hand is the answer to petty theft. That's ridiculous and barbaric.

Yet it works efficiently in stemming all possible future crimes. In my opinion it is barbaric to allows these crimes to flow unabated and to coddle the criminals which is what happens so often in the West.

 

[Meow Mix]

Except zina can also be between two people who are unmarried. Which is the interpretation of this verse, between two unmarried people who commit to sexual relations.

Does this mean that premarital sex is punishable by death, or what?

 

[Meow Mix]

Yet it works efficiently in stemming all possible future crimes. In my opinion it is barbaric to allows these crimes to flow unabated and to coddle the criminals which is what happens so often in the West.

I don't agree with coddling criminals but I don't agree with murdering people either. I wouldn't be comfortable being alone with or relying on anyone like you, that's all I can say. I hope better morals prevail in time or people oppressed by such evil will eventually have to free themselves one way or another. I hope it doesn't come to that, but I can never abide the existence or the aiding of evil and misery.

I'm sure if you killed everyone who pocketed a pack of gum it would stem that, too. I should just stop before I really type how I feel about being okay with murder. That's worse than the adultery crime IMO.

 

[Bismillah]

Does this mean that premarital sex is punishable by death, or what?

No it isn't, it is just a flaw in gnostic's assumption.

I don't agree with coddling criminals but I don't agree with murdering people either. I wouldn't be comfortable being alone with or relying on anyone like you, that's all I can say. I hope better morals prevail in time or people oppressed by such evil will eventually have to free themselves one way or another. I hope it doesn't come to that, but I can never abide the existence or the aiding of evil and misery.

They are no oppressed people...if anyone doesn't want to be ruled by Shariah they have the option not to. You don't agree with coddling criminals and yet that is all that happens in the Western penal system. It's interesting to see how the penal system struggles to contain the huge numbers of inmates.

These laws would most certainly be an effective barrier against that.

 

[Meow Mix]

No it isn't, it is just a flaw in gnostic's assumption.

You called it zina if I recall. So, people can have premarital sex without repurcussion?

They are no oppressed people...if anyone doesn't want to be ruled by Shariah they have the option not to. You don't agree with coddling criminals and yet that is all that happens in the Western penal system.

Well there are certainly a lot of oppressed people in Muslim majority countries right now. I know you say that would change with a "true" Muslim gov't, but do you really think it will ever be possible for someone to say "Oh, actually I'm not a Muslim" when the religious police come knocking to murder them for some petty offense? That they'll say "Oh, okay, sorry sir... we WERE going to murder you for agreeing to our taboos but now we're not? Have a good day?"

 

[Bismillah]

You called it zina if I recall. So, people can have premarital sex without repurcussion?

Correct it is called Zina. People can do anything they want...in their own privacy. People cannot have sex in public and premarital sex in public is punishable offense.

Well there are certainly a lot of oppressed people in Muslim majority countries right now. I know you say that would change with a "true" Muslim gov't, but do you really think it will ever be possible for someone to say "Oh, actually I'm not a Muslim" when the religious police come knocking to murder them for some petty offense? That they'll say "Oh, okay, sorry sir... we WERE going to murder you for agreeing to our taboos but now we're not? Have a good day?"

First these leaders that run Muslim countries are despicable. Worse in almost all regards than the Western leaders who instituted such puppets.

Second I agree with you. There is no way that a Shariah country can come to fruition within the current political system. Only by shedding and revolting against the status quo will such a system be possible.

Third they don't come knocking at their door. Again, the crime is committed in public and witnessed by the public.

And fourth you seem to be focusing on the actual punishment when the point of these codes is first to try and establish repentance and sincerity in their horror at their crime. Punishment is only seen fit for abnormal people who pose a threat to society.

 

[England my lionheart]

I'm not sure where you find it as inexcusable but that is one of the biggest transgressions in Islam and I could care less what secular thought says on the matter.

Because in Islam the most important thing in life is family and adultery is a clear undermining of the concept. That there would be people perverted and misguided enough to discount the honor and love of his wife and children to pursue their deeds in the public eye. Then that person has no place in a Muslim society. Ever.

But a Man with four Wives does?