Swear on the Bible or the Koran?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

catholic2

Guest
A first for America…The Koran replaces the Bible at swearing-in oath
What book will America base it’s values on, the Bible or the Koran?
Dear daniel,
Please take a moment to read the following TownHall.com column by Dennis Prager, who is a Jew. After reading the column, take the suggest action at the bottom of this email. After you have read it, please forward it to your friends and family.

America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on
By Dennis Prager - Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress, has announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran.

Please click on to see the full text. What do you think?
 
Eh. The whole point of taking the oath on the Bible is that in the mind of the one being sworn in, breaking the oath will damn them to Hell–so they are more likely to keep the oath. Taking an oath on a Bible would probably be a sin to a Muslim and therefore he would be more likely to break that oath. The best way to make sure a Muslim keeps an oath is to have him swear it on the Koran. Not that I believe he or 95% of our public officials take it that seriously anyway…
 
catholic2 said:
A first for America…The Koran replaces the Bible at swearing-in oath
What book will America base it’s values on, the Bible or the Koran?
Dear daniel,
Please take a moment to read the following TownHall.com column by Dennis Prager, who is a Jew. After reading the column, take the suggest action at the bottom of this email. After you have read it, please forward it to your friends and family.

America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on
By Dennis Prager - Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress, has announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran.

Please click on to see the full text. What do you think?
Click to expand...
Have you bothered to actually read the Constitution of the United States? The bible is not mentioned. Therefore, the bible is not required. Some other book may be substituted, or none at all. And in fact you need not swear an oath at all. Just affirm. 👍

(“What DO they teach kids in school these days?”)
 
Speaking of Oaths, doesn’t the Bible tell us not to swear them?

Ironic to swear on a book that tells us not to! Anyway, in the UK they have a choice of texts to swear or affirm the truth to cover everyone from Christian to Aetheist. (Pointless swearing by Almighty God if you don’t belive in him!)
 
Durendin said:
Speaking of Oaths, doesn’t the Bible tell us not to swear them?

Ironic to swear on a book that tells us not to! Anyway, in the UK they have a choice of texts to swear or affirm the truth to cover everyone from Christian to Aetheist. (Pointless swearing by Almighty God if you don’t belive in him!)
Click to expand...
Irony well taken!
 
Genesis315 said:
Eh. The whole point of taking the oath on the Bible is that in the mind of the one being sworn in, breaking the oath will damn them to Hell–so they are more likely to keep the oath. Taking an oath on a Bible would probably be a sin to a Muslim and therefore he would be more likely to break that oath. The best way to make sure a Muslim keeps an oath is to have him swear it on the Koran. Not that I believe he or 95% of our public officials take it that seriously anyway…
Click to expand...
:rotfl: I agree wholeheartedly with this statement
 
kellie said:
Has there ever been a Jewish congressman?

What did he swear on?
Click to expand...
From the article:
Of course, Ellison’s defenders argue that Ellison is merely being honest; since he believes in the Koran and not in the Bible, he should be allowed, even encouraged, to put his hand on the book he believes in. But for all of American history, Jews elected to public office have taken their oath on the Bible, even though they do not believe in the New Testament, and the many secular elected officials have not believed in the Old Testament either.
Click to expand...
 
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=122120

The main point of the thread I started today, is Can we trust that his oath on any book or on the name of Allah really have any meaning at all. I listed a few Hadiths on the topic, one showing where Muhammad himself went back on an oath.
Volume 8, Book 78, Number 618:
Click to expand...
Narrated 'Aisha:
Click to expand...
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq had never broken his oaths till Allah revealed the expiation for the oaths. Then he said, **“If I take an oath to do something and later on I find something else better than the first one, then I do what is better and make expiation for my oath.” **
Click to expand...
unless I am misreading this Hadith, Muslim oaths are of no value at all.

Maybe a Muslim can explain their understandings of oaths at the end of each thread related to this.
 
Daniel_Marsh said:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=122120

The main point of the thread I started today, is Can we trust that his oath on any book or on the name of Allah really have any meaning at all. I listed a few Hadiths on the topic, one showing where Muhammad himself went back on an oath.

unless I am misreading this Hadith, Muslim oaths are of no value at all.

Maybe a Muslim can explain their understandings of oaths at the end of each thread related to this.
Click to expand...
It means that if you made an oath to give half of your estate to charity and later decided that you will give 60% . Then you have not sinned by breaking your promise . You however have to fast three days .

The context here are to clarify that one shouldnt stop from doing more good deeds just because he made an oath on a less good deed. It doesnt talk about any oath in which its breaking brings harm. These are other types of oaths that are called ‘’ Dip Oath’’ in which teh consequence for breaking one would be a dip in the fire of hell ‘’ assuming that one is going to heaven clean.

This punishment is not including the punishment of harming other person . This p8unishment in case only if you made an oath by God knowingly that you lie and will not keep. defaming the name of God .

As for the punishment for a person in which the breaking of your oath brought him harm , thats a different story .

I hope people dont assume the worst about Islam before they ask .

Hope i clariffied.

salam
 
Hello Lt Tony brother,

Hope you are well and your family,

best regards,

Meedo
 
meedo said:
Hello Lt Tony brother,

Hope you are well and your family,

best regards,

Meedo
Click to expand...
Hi Meedo!

I found another hadith of this oath that explains it further:

Volume 8, Book 78, Number 620:
Narrated Abu Musa:

I went to the Prophet along with a group of Al-Ash’ariyin in order to request him to provide us with mounts. He said, “By Allah, I will not provide you with mounts and I haven’t got anything to mount you on.” Then we stayed there as long as Allah wished us to stay, and then three very nice looking she-camels were brought to him and he made us ride them. When we left, we, or some of us, said, “By Allah, we will not be blessed, as we came to the Prophet asking him for mounts, and he swore that he would not give us any mounts but then he did give us. So let us go back to the Prophet and remind him (of his oath).” When we returned to him (and reminded him of the fact), he said, “I did not give you mounts, but it is Allah Who gave you. By Allah, Allah willing, if I ever take an oath to do something and then I find something else than the first, I will make expiation for my oath and do the thing which is better (or do something which is better and give the expiation for my oath).”

From this hadith it does resemble what you have said above. I have a question though. If Mohammed was God’s final messanger wouldn’t he be able to prophecise that Allah would provide him with the mounts for the she-Camels?

God bless,
Jon
 
jonfan said:
Hi Meedo!

From this hadith it does resemble what you have said above. I have a question though. If Mohammed was God’s final messanger wouldn’t he be able to prophecise that Allah would provide him with the mounts for the she-Camels?

God bless,
Jon
Click to expand...
Hello Jon,

Messengers of God are humans whom God have bestowed each of them what he wanted to bestow.

A messenger of God doesnt have a set of special capabilities given to every messenger by default. Therefore if Muhammed prophecied anything about the future he did so because it was revealed to him. Not because he could automatically know the future bieng the Messenger of God . This is actually one of the points that is repeated in the Quran for the pagans of Mecca . That this messenger sent to them is not God and he is just one of them and he didnt come to challenge them with Miracles . Once Muhammed told the Meccans that he will answer one of their questions the next day and he forgot to say ‘‘If God wills it’’ God punished him by stopping the revelation from him for some time. The point of emphasis here is that Muhammed is a mere human with a message and that he has no powers by default and any ability given to him is by Gods will and choice of time and place of this ability and not by Muhammeds choice.

Thank you for your questions Jon , hope i clarified

All the best ,

Meedo
 
My :twocents:.

Its ok for Muslims to be sworn into office with a Koran.

Its ok for anyone having a concientious objection to decline to swear on any book.

There.
Now its settled.
Have a nice day.
 
meedo said:
Hello Jon,

Messengers of God are humans whom God have bestowed each of them what he wanted to bestow.

A messenger of God doesnt have a set of special capabilities given to every messenger by default. Therefore if Muhammed prophecied anything about the future he did so because it was revealed to him. Not because he could automatically know the future bieng the Messenger of God . This is actually one of the points that is repeated in the Quran for the pagans of Mecca . That this messenger sent to them is not God and he is just one of them and he didnt come to challenge them with Miracles . Once Muhammed told the Meccans that he will answer one of their questions the next day and he forgot to say ‘‘If God wills it’’ God punished him by stopping the revelation from him for some time. The point of emphasis here is that Muhammed is a mere human with a message and that he has no powers by default and any ability given to him is by Gods will and choice of time and place of this ability and not by Muhammeds choice.

Thank you for your questions Jon , hope i clarified

All the best ,

Meedo
Click to expand...
Thanks Meedo. This clarifies some things. Muslims would consider Mohammed on the same lines as Moses and other old Testament prophets. Jesus as the New Testament always knew what the Father would do. As he said I and the Father are one.

God bless,
Jon
 
If Larry Flynt ever became a congressman, would he be allowed to swear on HUSTLER mags?

I think abuses of swearing on any books are now in to smear the morality or belief values. Should oust all swearing and must swear by U.S. Consitution, period.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top