Question for Muslims...

[Reuben_J]

There are many forms of Sharia that goes hand in hand with secular law. And in Islam there are some issues that come as more important than others. Good education… freedom of opinion and freedom of election. absence of oppression … all these stuff are from sharia… may be they are common in secular law but they are from sharia… and they come as much moer important than enforcing headscarves in the street. Turkey is not sharia free… it was just smart enough to apply the most important aspects first . Remember it was the Muslim leaning party that created most of the economic, democratic and social success that Turkey enjoys today!

I say Turkey is closest to the essence of islam because of

1- People can elect whom they see fit

2- The ruling party is educated and seeks popular support , respects election and the rule of law ( weather bieng influenced by sharia or not)

3- Economic development

4- Educational development

5- The positive influence of faith onto the current government

As for Saudi… they are far away from the essence of Islam but are just trying to enforce the outer crust …sharia is not teh problem here… it is simply people know that there are deep seeted problems that are much more important . The saudi government are all bunch of rich oil emirs that dont care less about islam except for a show. To start with… they were never elected by the people.

Thanks meedo for your explanation. I will try to understand what you said and take it as face value from you.

God bless.

 

[Reuben_J]

He’s not being taken seriously by me, if that’s what you meant.

And it is your words against his words.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

There are many forms of Sharia that goes hand in hand with secular law. And in Islam there are some issues that come as more important than others. Good education… freedom of opinion and freedom of election. absence of oppression … all these stuff are from sharia… may be they are common in secular law but they are from sharia… and they come as much moer important than enforcing headscarves in the street. Turkey is not sharia free… it was just smart enough to apply the most important aspects first . Remember it was the Muslim leaning party that created most of the economic, democratic and social success that Turkey enjoys today!

I say Turkey is closest to the essence of islam because of

1- People can elect whom they see fit

2- The ruling party is educated and seeks popular support , respects election and the rule of law ( weather bieng influenced by sharia or not)

3- Economic development

4- Educational development

5- The positive influence of faith onto the current government
…

So, you think Turkey enjoys the democratic successes today due to its Muslim leaning party, and it is the closest to the essence of Islam, because of, among the things you listed, the positive influence of faith onto the current government?

Your statements skipped the fact that between 1998 and 2008 the European Court of Human Rights reached 1,600 judgments against Turkey for human rights violations, particularly the right to life and freedom from torture. Turkey’s human rights record, pertaining to rights of Kurds (who comprise 15% of the population) and women, and limitations to freedom of the press, are significant obstacles to future membership of the EU.

Importantly, it needs to be said that the brand of sharia in Turkey that you praise has its hand in making the country a very dangerous place for Christians, a vanishing minority, down to .6% of the population where 98 or 99% are Muslims.

Do you disagree that the country remains to be a place where priests are endangered, as they get murdered to the cries of ‘Allahu akbar’ of the killers, as what happened to Father Santoro in 2006? He was shot in the head at point blank range while he was praying in the front pew of his parish church.

There is trouble in Turkey. Catholic priests, recognizable because of their clothing and crosses on their persons, risk being killed, just by walking on the streets or travelling to and from monasteries and churches.

“We are no longer safe here,” said Bishop Luigi Padovese of Anatolia, at that time following the killing of Father Santoro. The bishop then had to travel with bodyguards as a precaution, which the interior ministry practically ‘forced’ him to accept.

In April 2007, three Christians were murdered in the bible publishing firm in Malatya, coincidentally, the hometown of Mehmet Ali Ağca, the assassin who shot and wounded Pope John Paul II on May 13, 1981.

In June 2010, Bishop Padovese himself was murdered in June 2010 in the most gruesome manner of decapitation, with his killer screaming “Allahu akbar” and “I killed the great Satan!”

If “sharia which goes hand in hand with secular government in Turkey” is supposed to bring about a tolerant liberal Islamic country, it does not seem to include or not meant to include Christians.

Are the fruits of democracy and social successes in Turkey only for Muslims?
.

 

[rinnie]

If there’s only hope in Jesus, then nobody who lived before Jesus would have had any hope. Is that fair? God kept sending them prophets, kept telling them to repent, but not about Jesus, not what the Church teaches today. So are they just screwed?

Moreover, if God’s “words and commandment remain the same forever,” then why don’t Christians have to follow all those laws in the Old Testament? A complicated answer summed into a simple word: abrogation.

Which of the ten commandments of God do you feel that we do not have to keep. Everything that God has said in the O,T, stands true for the N.T.

Could you show me which of the ten commandments that have changed?

 

[rinnie]

It was a simple question. Was Jesus a prophet or not? And the answer is yes, he was a prophet according to at least all four of the Gospels which refer to him as such.

Jesus we so much more then a mere prophet. Jesus was who he said he was. He was a Savior, a Redeemer he was the Christ.

Jesus is the only one who would either have us worship him, or despise him, despise him as mere man, or worship him as True God and True Man. That is the only alternative he presents.

 

[rinnie]

This is problematic for me, actually.

How does he “deal with stoning?” It seems to me, as an outside observer, and I’ll just assume the story is authentic, that the woman is being unjustly accused. If the woman was actually caught in adultery, a sin one cannot commit by oneself, naturally, then where is the man with whom she must’ve been caught?

Without the man too, it’s not fair. So since the entire situation isn’t fair for the woman, the response of Jesus (i.e., to not really respond at all except to call her accusers a bunch of hypocrites) seems appropriate.

What he doesn’t do is abolish the law–not there, nor anywhere. When I hear Christians say “fulfill,” honestly, I think that they actually mean “abolish” though they refuse to say it. Either the law applies to them, or it doesn’t.

And essentially Christians are saying that the law (or a law, like this one about adultery just as an example) doesn’t apply anymore.

Thats because you don’t understand what fulfill means. First of all what does the old Law have to do with the ten commandments??

Next the Old Law shows us that as sinners we cannot keep the law.
That is why in the N.T. Jesus took our execution for us.

Romans 3:23-24 All have sinned and are deprived of the Glory of God. They are justified freely by his grace through the Redemption in Christ Jesus.

And you are correct in one thing, it is in repentance that we are forgiven for our sins. All we must do is confess our sins and repent and we are forgiven. We are no longer stoned to death, our dear Lord Jesus took the stones for us. He took the beaten, He was stoned and crucified for our sins, for he had none of his own. This is how he fulfilled the O.L as it was predicted in the O.T.

The O.T foretells his comming that God is sending a Redeemer. The Savior of the World our Lord Jesus Christ.

What does scripture say, Abraham believed in God and credited to him as righteousness. It was not through the law that promise was made to Abraham and his descendants that he would inherit the world but through the righteousness that comes from faith.

Therefore since we have been justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus through whom we have gained access by faith to this grace in which we stand and we boast in hope of the Glory of God.

For Christ while we were still helpless yet died at the appointed time for the ungodly. Read Romans it is all in there.

 

[dolphinlove]

I stand by what I said, and don’t really appreciate your wild fantasy here, trying to make up things that didn’t happen, or to distort the truth so something benign sounds evil.

I bet your next claim is going to be the hadith is not authentic, am i correct?
Amy, there is a dramatic difference between a tight hug and someone pushing on you so you can barely breathe!
Also, why did the muslim angel gabriel come in such a frightening manner to mohammad?
Wouldnt an angel of God be gental and loving to Gods creation? Just like when Gabriel appeared to Mary?

 

[Louie1983]

I bet your next claim is going to be the hadith is not authentic, am i correct?
Amy, there is a dramatic difference between a tight hug and someone pushing on you so you can barely breathe!
Also, why did the muslim angel gabriel come in such a frightening manner to mohammad?
Wouldnt an angel of God be gental and loving to Gods creation? Just like when Gabriel appeared to Mary?

I can think of one (fallen)angel who would use such force…

 

[Charlotte408]

I have one, if I may.

Do Muslims have any sort of Authority they answer to?

Several Muslim wemon I’ve talked to have said that wearing a Burkha or Hijab is a personal choice. They say that back east, the government is overstepping its boundaries and not following Ilsam as intended, they are just using the religion, and falsely to control the people…

But I would think, that if you asked the Muslims over there (where the religion came from) that they would say the westernized Muslims, with this liberalized notion, actually have it backwards.

So just like how we might say that a protestant has no authority compared to say the CC…is there an authority in Islam??

Also, its weird because I see a lot of Muslims harp on Christianity because there are so many different sects with different beliefs and Islam APPEARS to be one, large group with a solid set of beliefs, but really from what I’ve seen, what you believe in regards to Islam depends on where you live

In the same way the CC contains the FULLNESS of Christian truth, is there an Authority that has the FULLNESS of Islamic truth, that the Muslims must accept?

 

[elwill]

I have one, if I may.

Do Muslims have any sort of Authority they answer to?

Several Muslim wemon I’ve talked to have said that wearing a Burkha or Hijab is a personal choice. They say that back east, the government is overstepping its boundaries and not following Ilsam as intended, they are just using the religion, and falsely to control the people…

But I would think, that if you asked the Muslims over there (where the religion came from) that they would say the westernized Muslims, with this liberalized notion, actually have it backwards.

So just like how we might say that a protestant has no authority compared to say the CC…is there an authority in Islam??

Also, its weird because I see a lot of Muslims harp on Christianity because there are so many different sects with different beliefs and Islam APPEARS to be one, large group with a solid set of beliefs, but really from what I’ve seen, what you believe in regards to Islam depends on where you live

In the same way the CC contains the FULLNESS of Christian truth, is there an Authority that has the FULLNESS of Islamic truth, that the Muslims must accept?

i have to ask you firstly , if those women have authority to saying that , or it was just their mere personal openion ?

theire are some issues in islam which scholars of islam disputed about , but hijab not one of these issues ,

afterall , sholars not talking without proofs , which means they base your openion upon their knowledge from quran and sunnah

 

[FightingFat]

i have to ask you firstly , if those women have authority to saying that , or it was just their mere personal openion ?

theire are some issues in islam which scholars of islam disputed about , but hijab not one of these issues ,

afterall , sholars not talking without proofs , which means they base your openion upon their knowledge from quran and sunnah

Can you point us to a verse in the Qur’an that says women must wear hijab elwill?

 

[elwill]

Can you point us to a verse in the Qur’an that says women must wear hijab elwill?

“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers, or their brothers’ sons or their sisters’ sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31).

“O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be recognised and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.” (Quran 33:59)

 

[FightingFat]

Thank you. My translation says “tell the believing women to lower their eyes, guard their private parts, and not display their charms except what is apparent outwardly”

This would seem to say “except what you would normally see”, not “cover yourself from head to foot”. Do you think burkha and hijab as equally valid?

 

[elwill]

Thank you. My translation says “tell the believing women to lower their eyes, guard their private parts, and not display their charms except what is apparent outwardly”

This would seem to say “except what you would normally see”, not “cover yourself from head to foot”. Do you think burkha and hijab as equally valid?

yes , that’s right interpretation for you but not accurate one according to scholars

here , we arrived to the point where someone should to have knowledge about arabic as a language , and knowledge about the culture and background of the society when this verse revealed , and the reaction of muslims once this verse revealed to the prophet (pbuh) . and entire teaching of the prophet (pbuh) which we called as “sunnah” .

knowledge of these things spot more light about the issue more than merely english translation , are you agree with me ?

some scholars believe that burkah is obligatory , others says that Hijab is enough as an obligation
both openions accept the other’s openion to be valid
i myself believe that hijab is obligatory , burqah not

 

[FightingFat]

yes , that’s right interpretation for you but not accurate one according to scholars

here , we arrived to the point where someone should to have knowledge about arabic as a language , and knowledge about the culture and background of the society when this verse revealed , and the reaction of muslims once this verse revealed to the prophet (pbuh) . and entire teaching of the prophet (pbuh) which we called as “sunnah” .

knowledge of these things spot more light about the issue more than merely english translation , are you agree with me ?

I do (as it happens). It would seem to limit the reach of the Qur’an somewhat though, don’t you think??

 

[Charlotte408]

“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear therof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers, or their brothers’ sons or their sisters’ sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31).

“O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be recognised and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.” (Quran 33:59)

Thank you for that Elwill. The point that she was making, though, was not that the Quran doesn’t SUGGEST wearing a hijab, but that it doesn’t MANDATE the wearing of the hijab. She seems to think that the government in SA or ‘Muslim countries’ (being only called Muslim countries because that’s the majority of the population), and the culture, etc, is wrong for MANDATING the hijab or burkha, and that its meant to be a suggestion, for their personal decision, if they wish to wear it or not.

And the first thought that came to MY mind was the same as yours, what authority does SHE have to say that? Islam comes from over there, thats where its thickest…I would think they would have it just right. And this is probably her personal interpretation. Which made me wonder what authority I could look at to find out if it was indeed mandated.

Its mandated under shariah law right? and shariah law is mandated by Islam right? So…I guess I was looking for the link, to show that the government/culture and the mandating of the hijab comes directly from Islam.

 

[elwill]

I do (as it happens). It would seem to limit the reach of the Qur’an somewhat though, don’t you think??

i think that offcourse it’s very logical for me that level of understanding quran in it’s arabic language by arabs will be more accurate than understanding it from translated ones

is that what you meant ?

 

[elwill]

Thank you for that Elwill. The point that she was making, though, was not that the Quran doesn’t SUGGEST wearing a hijab, but that it doesn’t MANDATE the wearing of the hijab. She seems to think that the government in SA or ‘Muslim countries’ (being only called Muslim countries because that’s the majority of the population), and the culture, etc, is wrong for MANDATING the hijab or burkha, and that its meant to be a suggestion, for their personal decision, if they wish to wear it or not.

And the first thought that came to MY mind was the same as yours, what authority does SHE have to say that? Islam comes from over there, thats where its thickest…I would think they would have it just right. And this is probably her personal interpretation. Which made me wonder what authority I could look at to find out if it was indeed mandated.

Its mandated under shariah law right? and shariah law is mandated by Islam right? So…I guess I was looking for the link, to show that the government/culture and the mandating of the hijab comes directly from Islam.

if that was her intension , then my answer is no
it’s not mandated under shariah law , no earthly punishment are suggested by quran or sunnah upon those who don’t wear hijab

 

[Charlotte408]

So if the hijab isn’t mandated by Sharia Law, then a woman over in say, SA wouldn’t be punished for choosing not to wear one?

Thank you Elwill for letting me pick your brain on this one…

 

[FightingFat]

i think that offcourse it’s very logical for me that level of understanding quran in it’s arabic language by arabs will be more accurate than understanding it from translated ones

is that what you meant ?

No, I meant that your premise mitigates its effectiveness anywhere but Arabia.