Doctor in SA punished with 70 lashes once a week.

[Sister_Amy]

Could not Muhammad intervene from heaven and relieve her pain?
Upon the poor doctor: Lord, have mercy. Christ, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Amen.

Did Jesus intervene? Could he?

What a goofy question you ask. Muslims do not believe Muhammad is divine in any sense.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Excellent post! This expresses perfectly how I feel! Charity and kindness don’t work with Muslims. What they need is shock treatment to wake them up from their robotic stupor and make them face the reality of their cruel and inhuman beliefs. :clapping: :clapping:

Here’s an example of what Muslims want for the USA and stated by a college student member of the MSA (Muslim Student Assn)

“Whether you vote for the white kafir or the half-black kafir, they will kill our brothers and sisters. They will subjugate our brothers and sisters. And they will certainly support Israel in killing our brothers and sisters. There is no “lesser of two evils” here. They are both greater evils. The lesser evil is avoiding the situation, as both are equally poisonous to the cause of Islam…Brothers and sisters, I have one thing to say: DON"T sic] VOTE.”

"Those who do not govern according to to sic.] the (law) which Allah has revealed Shari’ah law], verily, they are the kaafiroon…

Democracy, like all other systems fabricated by the minds of men are untenable in Islam. It is an un-Islamic system…[and] there is absolutely no basis anywhere in the Qur’aan for western democracy and its parliamentary system. A government of democracy is a government appointed by Juhhaal (ignoramuses). Ignoramuses, fussaaq and fujjaar have no share in appointing a government in Islam. The Islamic system is Khilaafat…"


And this is being allowed in our country! Wake up, America!

Vickie

This is lame.

There was a debate recently between Muslim supporters of McCain, and Muslim supporters of Obama–would you like to read it? I know a few people who approve of neither, but really they’re on the fringe. And I don’t know anyone who is arguing for American shari’ah. But it’s always cute when you let your paranoia show, Vickie.

 

[Good_Fella]

Similarly, I have also studied my faith seriously. Whereas Sam has not studied Islam seriously. Moreover, the post is not about Islam. I simply said Saudi judges are corrupt–they are. Has nothing to do with being Americanized.

Perhaps these Saudi judges are true Muslims who strictly adhere to the prescriptions in the Qur’ an. I’m aware that the Qur’ an prescribes 100 lashes for ‘zina’, sexual intercourse outside of marriage.

 

[Ne_OrangeKnight]

I will be praying for this man

Amen.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

 

[Sister_Amy]

Perhaps these Saudi judges are true Muslims who strictly adhere to the prescriptions in the Qur’ an. I’m aware that the Qur’ an prescribes 100 lashes for ‘zina’, sexual intercourse outside of marriage.

(1) Rape is not zina.

(2) Rape is not adultery.

(3) The punishment for adultery (which is death in classical law) applies to men and women equally.

(4) The punishment for adultery is dependent on the eye-witness accounts of at least four reliable sane adults.

(4) Rape is not fornication.

(5) The punishment for fornication (which is lashes) applies to men and women equally.

(6) The punishment for fornication is also dependent on the eye-witness accounts of at least four sane adults.

In no way at all can rape ever be considered fornication, or adultery, it cannot be ‘zina,’ and cannot be punished as zina. Do you think four people would witness the rape of a woman and accuse her of fornication?

And as I seem to have to remind people, a woman cannot fornicate with herself. If four witnesses saw her, then they must have also seen her partner, so the punishment should, of course, not spare the man.

 

[ralphinal]

Here is a question. Do you believe that I know more about Christianity, or someone who converted into Christianity?

I would WITHOUT DOUBT accept knowledge about Christianity from a convert TO Christianity, more than I would accept my own knowledge on the subject. Because I would assume that such a person had studied their faith very seriously.

Similarly, I have also studied my faith seriously. Whereas Sam has not studied Islam seriously. Moreover, the post is not about Islam. I simply said Saudi judges are corrupt–they are. Has nothing to do with being Americanized.

Secondly, I don’t think it’s fair for you to assume I only know some “Americanized” Islam, if there is such a thing (there is, and I really have such disdain for it that I hate to be associated with it.)

When my two primary sheikhs are from Syria and Egypt respectively, when my Qur’an teacher has studied in Saudi Arabia, and the sheikhs I most prefer to learn from other than these are from Saudi Arabia (Medina and Riyadh), why do you say I only know Americanized Islam? When my teachers are all from the middle east? Just think about it.

Serious question: do you think that your studies of Islam have been helped by having sheikhs from Syria and Egypt and teachers that have studied in SA verses teachers from only one country?

I think that it may be less about Americanized and more about balance of approach.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Serious question: do you think that your studies of Islam have been helped by having sheikhs from Syria and Egypt and teachers that have studied in SA verses teachers from only one country?

I think that it may be less about Americanized and more about balance of approach.

I’m not really sure if I understand your question.

Of course I think the diversity of scholars I’ve been able to learn from is beautiful–but also that they are from seats of knowledge in the Muslim world. Even in their own experiences, they have learned Islam with a tolerance to the diversity of it.

What is beautiful about Islam is that I am learning the same from all my teachers–they typically will teach, if a few opinions exist on the matter, the major opinions and reasons behind them, and allow the students to pick one or neither or a combination thereof. Especially my Syrian sheikh does that.

My Egyptian sheikh usually gives me the majority opinion unless I’m kind of persistent to get more.

Overall it’s helped me to be more tolerant of a variety of views in Islam, for instance.

Did that come close to answering…? sorry… lol

 

[ralphinal]

I’m not really sure if I understand your question.

Of course I think the diversity of scholars I’ve been able to learn from is beautiful–but also that they are from seats of knowledge in the Muslim world. Even in their own experiences, they have learned Islam with a tolerance to the diversity of it.

What is beautiful about Islam is that I am learning the same from all my teachers–they typically will teach, if a few opinions exist on the matter, the major opinions and reasons behind them, and allow the students to pick one or neither or a combination thereof. Especially my Syrian sheikh does that.

My Egyptian sheikh usually gives me the majority opinion unless I’m kind of persistent to get more.

Overall it’s helped me to be more tolerant of a variety of views in Islam, for instance.

Did that come close to answering…? sorry… lol

Actually, it does.

Just because the teachings are the same, it does not mean that the emphasis placed on them would be, or the interpretation and application. THe better teachers encourage students to learn.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Actually, it does.

Just because the teachings are the same, it does not mean that the emphasis placed on them would be, or the interpretation and application. THe better teachers encourage students to learn.

Last week I was in a Seerah (biography of Muhammad) class with my sheikh (from Syria) and we were talking about a story that Gabriel visited Muhammad when he was a young boy and cut his chest open and washed his heart in Zam Zam water to remove a black spot from it.

He basically told us that some scholars have the opinion that this literally happened, while others think that it’s just kind of a metaphor for something.

And his suggestion to us was that we believe in it (since it’s an authentic report) as it was reported without trying to force it to mean one thing or signify one thing, etc.

 

[po18guy]

Did Jesus intervene? Could he?

Yes. Ask the OP sometime.

What a goofy question you ask. Muslims do not believe Muhammad is divine in any sense.

Well, it’s a start. Is he alive or dead?

 

[Sister_Amy]

Yes. Ask the OP sometime.

Well, it’s a start. Is he alive or dead?

So Jesus relieved her pain? Why the complaint then? Jesus steps in and prevent all people from suffering… how nice.

Muhammad is dead, to answer your question. I thought it was common knowledge.

 

[po18guy]

So Jesus relieved her pain? Why the complaint then? Jesus steps in and prevent all people from suffering… how nice.

You misunderstood. Ask the OP if Jesus intervenes in one’s life. via the Holy Spirit. The OP has a very strong testimony.

Muhammad is dead, to answer your question. I thought it was common knowledge.

No life in heaven? Where is his soul then?

 

[Sister_Amy]

You misunderstood. Ask the OP if Jesus intervenes in one’s life. via the Holy Spirit. The OP has a very strong testimony.

I’d like to know why Jesus did not intervene in the suffering of some poor girl. Or the Holy Spirit or whatever.

No life in heaven? Where is his soul then?

Are you not aware of the meaning of the word ‘dead?’ Or do you disbelieve in death?

He is in his grave. It’s in Medina. Muslims believe that after people die they have a life of the grave where they might be punished or tortured, and that one day everybody will be resurrected and judged. Paradise comes after judgment.

For now it’s sufficient to say a person is dead.

The dead are not walking around beside you, and they can’t hear you talking to them either.

 

[po18guy]

I’d like to know why Jesus did not intervene in the suffering of some poor girl. Or the Holy Spirit or whatever.

If He directly intervened in every situation, you would be Christian. As it is, he leaves us with our free will to choose the right path, or wrong.

Are you not aware of the meaning of the word ‘dead?’ Or do you disbelieve in death?

We seem to be on a Christian site. Christians believe, even know, that the life of the soul continues forever. That souls in Heaven, hell or purgatory are still alive. Death, to the Christian is but a door to eternity.

He is in his grave. It’s in Medina. Muslims believe that after people die they have a life of the grave where they might be punished or tortured, and that one day everybody will be resurrected and judged. Paradise comes after judgment.

I’m guessing that judgment may also go against a soul?

The dead are not walking around beside you, and they can’t hear you talking to them either.

Very true, if they are dead. But death is a human concept that reveals our limited understanding. In the case of a Christian, we are members of the Body of Christ, with Him as our Head. Only condemnation to hell eternally separates us from Him, the rest remaining in communion with him, either on earth, in purgatory (similar to the grave for you), or in Heaven. Thus, our belief in the Saints, who are glorified in Heaven.

However, this has drifted off course.

It remains to be seen how the SA judge doubling the doctor’s sentence has anything whatever to do with justice, or rather power and revenge.

 

[Sister_Amy]

I never said the judge or ruling was just…

I actually accused the judge of corruption.

 

[bilop]

this is just crazy. The American government should stop being allied with the depraved kingdom of saudi arabia which is known for its many human rights violations though ofcourse they never will because of their supply of oil to america.

Quite frankly, I wonder why we don’t just take the oil. No one really lives in the oil rich areas. We’d probably take less casualties in seizing the fields than we do fighting insurgency for one month in Iraq or Afghanistan.

We could establish a homeland for Christian Arabs, located right on top of those nice oil fields. Give them arms and training, like we do with Israel, and one American Armored Division based there just in case.

Bye bye funding for jihadists. Bye bye OPEC’s power.

Seems like no downside to me.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Quite frankly, I wonder why we don’t just take the oil. No one really lives in the oil rich areas. We’d probably take less casualties in seizing the fields than we do fighting insurgency for one month in Iraq or Afghanistan.

We could establish a homeland for Christian Arabs, located right on top of those nice oil fields. Give them arms and training, like we do with Israel, and one American Armored Division based there just in case.

Bye bye funding for jihadists. Bye bye OPEC’s power.

Seems like no downside to me.

The words “illegal” and “immoral” mean nothing to you, do they?

Tell me, what would Jesus do? Steal land?

 

[GemmaRose]

The words “illegal” and “immoral” mean nothing to you, do they?

Tell me, what would Jesus do? Steal land?

For once, I agree with Sister Amy.

 

[ralphinal]

For once, I agree with Sister Amy.

I was going to say the same thing…although I have agreed with her before.

Now, give me a few more attacks funded by Saudi Money, I might change my mind…

 

[bilop]

The words “illegal” and “immoral” mean nothing to you, do they?

Tell me, what would Jesus do? Steal land?

How’d the ruling family get the land in the first place?

If having the oil wealth of the gulf in the hands of its current holders is destabilizing to the world (it is) and if they use that wealth to spread extremism and fund people who kill Americans (they do), and if they oppress their people (they do) I see no moral problem in taking that wealth away from them.

I’m not proposing annexing it to the U.S., just establishing a more friendly and just regime.

No different than what we did when we invaded France in 1944.

The House of Saud is no more legitimate than the Vichy French government.