This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Your Perfect Country
- Geert Wilders's far-right PVV wins most seats in Dutch election
- 2023 OCR A-level History
- Unpopular opinions
- Essay Competition Questions
- Participation crisis essay
- could someone mark this politics edexcel alevel essay please?
- Politics edexcel alevel 2023 predictions
- History NEA question for the coursework
- Should i vote Labour?
- Bath vs Glasgow
- Official University of Leicester - Talk to Clearing Student - Thread
- Higher English Persuasive Essay Suggestions?
- Uni of Bristol - snobs?
- Edexcel A-level Politics Paper 1 (9PL0 01) - 23rd May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- AQA A-Level Politics Paper 2 - 7152/2 7 June 2023 [Exam chat]
- I need responses for my dissertation survey! please fill
- Classic Civilization A-level
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3B: 9PL0 3B - 17 June 2022 [Exam Chat]
- politics essay help please
Democracy and culture regarding islamification.
Scroll to see replies
roots
Why am i associating Britain and Kaafir? It is ran by Kaafirs according Kufr, it allows Kufr and the majority of its people are people of Kufr.
Why am i associating Britain and Kaafir? It is ran by Kaafirs according Kufr, it allows Kufr and the majority of its people are people of Kufr.
Why are you talking crap
Kaafir is someone who is an active trangressor against Islam. Who spread lies against Islam.
Muslim people does not equal Islam. Invading a muslim country does not make a Kaafir, otherwise how would you explain muslim countries having war with other muslim countries
So who are the Kaafirs then.
The only Kaafir I can see, is that ******* annoying mouse
Naffy
Show me a verse of the Quran, where woman cannot take big responsibilities (such as cars), where it forbids secular law, where it says we should cover for what ordinarily appears on women, the Quran in fact says the opposite, show me where we have to execute homosexuals, show me where a caliph dictator is necessity.
Show me then, you cant show me, because they dont exist.
These laws are a product of Backward culture people, who havent got their heads out of the dirt.
It doesnt matter because Iran is facing a democratic revolution, the Saudi monarchy will eventually become overthrown, and the taliban would never see the day of light ever again.
Show me then, you cant show me, because they dont exist.
These laws are a product of Backward culture people, who havent got their heads out of the dirt.
It doesnt matter because Iran is facing a democratic revolution, the Saudi monarchy will eventually become overthrown, and the taliban would never see the day of light ever again.
- Cars? The Saudi Government banned this due to other Islamic laws and for safety reasons. Women are not allowed to be alone with non Mahrams, women must be veiled in public, it poses a threat to safety.
- Secular law? Alhamdulillah brother, as you know so much about the Quran you must know about Surah al Maidah. You must have heard of the other famous ayahs on this topic?
- Opposite of what? All the Muslims after the Prophet were following something known as the Sunnah, an explanation of the Qur'an. Muslims didn't suddenly start following the Sunnah after Bukhari. Do you believe that all the Muslims including the sahaba who the Qur'an praises were misleaded and that this new sect which you follow has it right? You do also realise that they were obeying the Prophets orders and example during his lifetime. Where is the condemnation of this in the Qur'an?
- What was done to the people of Lot? Yes, they were all killed. Refer to the hadith.
- Are you denying the Caliph as well?
Is it me or are you denying parts of Islam, the more difficult parts in particular? What is wrong with you Naffy, you are young yet you have no fire, no courage, nothing. Screw what others are doing. Most of my family don't practise the deen properly, few of my friends do, i tell you they are wrong, i will not go ahead and change the deen just to make others comfortable. Just to fit in.
roots
- Cars? The Saudi Government banned this due to other Islamic laws and for safety reasons. Women are not allowed to be alone with non Mahrams, women must be veiled in public, it poses a threat to safety.
Exactly.
Didn’t Britain introduce new stop and search laws after the killing spree of teenagers in London?
Didn’t Britain introduce new terrorism laws after a couple terrorist attacks?
Saudi government done it for the same reason.
BBC
Became law after an incident in 1990, when 47 women challenged the authorities by taking their families' cars out for a drive.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7000499.stm
roots
Is it me or are you denying parts of Islam, the more difficult parts in particular? What is wrong with you Naffy, you are young yet you have no fire, no courage, nothing. Screw what others are doing. Most of my family don't practise the deen properly, few of my friends do, i tell you they are wrong, i will not go ahead and change the deen just to make others comfortable. Just to fit in.
Exactly. Young Muslims are starting to become half-hearted.
Naffy
Why are you talking crap
Kaafir is someone who is an active trangressor against Islam. Who spread lies against Islam.
Muslim people does not equal Islam. Invading a muslim country does not make a Kaafir, otherwise how would you explain muslim countries having war with other muslim countries
So who are the Kaafirs then.
The only Kaafir I can see, is that ******* annoying mouse
Kaafir is someone who is an active trangressor against Islam. Who spread lies against Islam.
Muslim people does not equal Islam. Invading a muslim country does not make a Kaafir, otherwise how would you explain muslim countries having war with other muslim countries
So who are the Kaafirs then.
The only Kaafir I can see, is that ******* annoying mouse
That is another topic where each sides position has to be examined.
Fighting Muslims can take you outside of Islaam.
Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 191:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said, "Whoever takes up arms against us, is not from us."
Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 197:
Narrated 'Abdullah:
The Prophet, said, "Abusing a Muslim is Fusuq (evil doing) and killing him is Kufr (disbelief)."
Naffy
Why are you talking crap
Kaafir is someone who is an active trangressor against Islam. Who spread lies against Islam.
Muslim people does not equal Islam. Invading a muslim country does not make a Kaafir, otherwise how would you explain muslim countries having war with other muslim countries
So who are the Kaafirs then.
The only Kaafir I can see, is that ******* annoying mouse
Kaafir is someone who is an active trangressor against Islam. Who spread lies against Islam.
Muslim people does not equal Islam. Invading a muslim country does not make a Kaafir, otherwise how would you explain muslim countries having war with other muslim countries
So who are the Kaafirs then.
The only Kaafir I can see, is that ******* annoying mouse
Because I am not half-hearted like you to spread LIES about Islam. I tell Islam in its purest form. Many Muslims on here agree with me on the basis of:
Democracy
Freedom of speech (blasphemy and preaching other religions)
Freedom of sexuality
Freedom of religion
Secularity
Naffy
Why are you talking crap
Kaafir is someone who is an active trangressor against Islam. Who spread lies against Islam.
Muslim people does not equal Islam. Invading a muslim country does not make a Kaafir, otherwise how would you explain muslim countries having war with other muslim countries
So who are the Kaafirs then.
The only Kaafir I can see, is that ******* annoying mouse
Kaafir is someone who is an active trangressor against Islam. Who spread lies against Islam.
Muslim people does not equal Islam. Invading a muslim country does not make a Kaafir, otherwise how would you explain muslim countries having war with other muslim countries
So who are the Kaafirs then.
The only Kaafir I can see, is that ******* annoying mouse
Kafir - Disbelievers
Are Britain not Kafirs than?
EDIT: ignore the first post, it didnt post properly
Truth About Islam and its laws
it is believed by many, including some muslims, that the ways of the quran and islam are incompatible with democracy, modernity, intellectual development, and humanity.
these are all myths which can be debunked from either the quran, or the established history of islam.
Islam and Democracy
Democracy is not a form of government, as many might think. this proven by the fact that the US, UK, france, india, and japan are all democracies, yet they have vastly different political setups.
Democracy is an ideal. its a vision. democracy holds as its fundamental principle that all men are created equal and that all people have the freedom to choose the course of their lives. so long as these conditions are met, it does not matter what kind of governance is present. the principles of equality, freedom, rule of law, and justice are all enshrined in the quran.
the Quran speaks of the unity of mankind in many places:
He has created you [all] out of one living entity, and out of it fashioned its mate...
surah 39, verse 6
O men! Behold, We have created you all out of a male and a female, [15] and have made you into nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another. [16] Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware.
surah 49, verse 13
I created the Jinn and Mankind only that they might worship Me
surah 51, verse 56
from these verses we see that there is ample evidence of the equality of all people. there is no racist, national, tribal, or ethnic differentiator between people. the only thing which separates mankind is piety.
at present, none of the world's governing system's can offer the absolute panoramic equality of all people which the islamic system can offer. politicians and their families in every nation enjoy unparalleled immunity from crimes. the islamic system makes no distinction between people. the ruler is just as accountable to the state as any commoner.
now one might suggest, that islam, with its plethora of rules is exactly opposite to the principles of liberty. how wrong this assumption is.
all societies, be they democratic or autocratic, have their own laws. not a single society allows its citizens to do whatever they please. rules, moral or otherwise, are absolutely necessary for the smooth functioning of civil society. the only difference is where each community draws its lines. but lines are drawn everywhere.
in the lead up to the War on Terror, many "experts" opined that muslims seemed to be a fascination with autocracy.
the current trend of dictatorship, monarchy, and tyranny that the muslim world exhibits is not at all in the spirit of the islamic system.
one has only to look at the very early history of the khilafah (caliphate) to understand that Abu Bakr ascended to the leadership, not by usurping power himself, but by concesus. Abu Bakr was selected during at meeting between the muhajireen (muslim emmigrants from mecca) and the ansar (the muslims of medina). Abu Bakr had actually suggested making Umar bin al Khattab or Abu Ubaydah the caliph. However, Umar's suggestion of Abu Bakr stuck and both the muhajireen and the ansar pledged allegiance (bai'ah) to the caliphate of Abu Bakr.
Islam and Intellectual Development
it is well known that the first verse of the quran to be revealed was:
surah 96, verse 1
the first verse of the quran was revealed as an injunction to read. indeed the word 'quran' means recitation.
throughout the pages of quran, there are endless exortations to "read" and "think".
Surely, in this are signs for those who see (or understand or learn the lesson from the sings of Allah)
surah 15, verse 75
Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget to practice it? An ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense?
surah 2, verse 44
we see that the quran also asks many rhetorical questions whose purpose is not to find answers, but rather to invoke thought in readers.
it is also interesting to note that of all the major intellectual achievements to come out of the muslim world, almost all of them, if not all, have come after the advent of islam in that area. men such as al jabbar, khayyam, khwarizmi, avicena (ibn sina), and averroes (ibn rushd) were all equivalent to the nobel laureates of their time. in fact, much of the basis of modern science would be impossible without the works of these men.
if islam had nothing to do with such intellectual development, why is it that wikipedia's list of polymaths or renaissance men is almost completely populated by arabs and persians after the advent of islam (i.e after 630 AD)? (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymath ). no doubt other polymaths of non-muslim origin existed, but the list of arabs, turks, and persians are exclusive to those after the arrival of islam.
much of the work of the muslim academics involved translating the works of the Greek and Roman greats. without this, western civilization would be far different, and might not be considered "civilized" at all. without an emphasis on the importance of education, both islamic and secular, arab, turkish, or persian people would not study the works of greek and latin origins.
Islam and Modernity
much of this subject is covered in the section immediately above. however, a few more points can be made.
there is nothing in the quran or the sunnah which urges muslims to lead a backward or anti-modern life. there is a strong emphasis on evading religious innovations (bid'ah), but nothing which states that computers or the internet is evil and to be avoided.
examples of technology being meshed with religion is of course the muezzin's loudspeaker. no verse of the quran or tenet of islam can be used to outlaw the loudspeaker, and yet loudspeakers are quite modern in the contexts of ancient religions.
in fact, the argument that islam is opposed to electricity or artificial pacemakers is so ridiculous, that i won't even devote any more time to refuting it. should the argument come up, i will address it later on in the thread or elsewhere.
Islam and Humanity
it has been argued that the islamic penal system is archaic and barbaric. before i say anything further, i would like to make two points:
1) the quran never ever stipulates the stoning to death of adulterers
2) the quran never advocates execution for those who leave islam
as far as apostates, or people who convert out of islam, the quran says:
Lo! Those who disbelieve after their profession of belief, and afterward grow violent in disbelief, their repentance will not be accepted. And such are those who are astray. surah 3, verse 90
for the adulterers, this verse:
Quote:
The adulterer and the adulteress, scourge ye each one of them with a hundred stripes. And let not pity for the twain withhold you from obedience to Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of believers witness their punishment.
surah 22, verse 2
the quran is, in the muslim view at least, the only 100% infallible source of scripture. the hadith, no matter how authentic, do not have the infallibility of the quran. therefore, there is strong reason to believe, logically, that stoning to death of adulterers and executing converts are not a part of the islamic system, despite its presence is modern "sharia" law via "authentic" hadith.
couple that with verse 256 in surah 2:
the evidence against talibanis (and islamophobes) is damning. an open and shut case.
the quran does advocate amputating the hands of thieves. it must be noted, that what is considered criminal in the modern sense is not considered criminal under true sharia law. a starving person stealing food is NOT committing a crime, but actually a virtue as Allah has commanded muslims to strive to survive.
those who are deemed mentally handicapped are also not committing crimes. people who are truly committing criminal acts, are the only ones who are punished. and that too, only if there are 4 witnesses never known to tell lies, who saw the crime being committed by the defendant in question. hence achieving a guilty verdict on a case of theft or adultery, should be damn near impossible.
secondly in the extremely rare case that a person should be found guilty, one might argue that chopping off their hand is "barbaric". unless one advocates no punishment at all, all options are barbaric. it is barbaric to keep a person locked up in a cage like an animal even for a few days. it is barbaric to put him or her in a position where they can be raped. faced with those alternatives, i might actually wish to have my hand chopped off.
true barbarism is to steal what does not belong to you for no reason. true barbarism is to get away with it, as most offenders are repeat offenders. true barbarism is a system which executes people who latter are vindicated using DNA evidence. true barbarism is watching you're loved one's killer get away scotch-free because they have the money to hire a big shot attorney. thats true barbarism.
Truth About Islam and its laws
it is believed by many, including some muslims, that the ways of the quran and islam are incompatible with democracy, modernity, intellectual development, and humanity.
these are all myths which can be debunked from either the quran, or the established history of islam.
Islam and Democracy
Democracy is not a form of government, as many might think. this proven by the fact that the US, UK, france, india, and japan are all democracies, yet they have vastly different political setups.
Democracy is an ideal. its a vision. democracy holds as its fundamental principle that all men are created equal and that all people have the freedom to choose the course of their lives. so long as these conditions are met, it does not matter what kind of governance is present. the principles of equality, freedom, rule of law, and justice are all enshrined in the quran.
the Quran speaks of the unity of mankind in many places:
He has created you [all] out of one living entity, and out of it fashioned its mate...
surah 39, verse 6
O men! Behold, We have created you all out of a male and a female, [15] and have made you into nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another. [16] Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware.
surah 49, verse 13
I created the Jinn and Mankind only that they might worship Me
surah 51, verse 56
from these verses we see that there is ample evidence of the equality of all people. there is no racist, national, tribal, or ethnic differentiator between people. the only thing which separates mankind is piety.
at present, none of the world's governing system's can offer the absolute panoramic equality of all people which the islamic system can offer. politicians and their families in every nation enjoy unparalleled immunity from crimes. the islamic system makes no distinction between people. the ruler is just as accountable to the state as any commoner.
now one might suggest, that islam, with its plethora of rules is exactly opposite to the principles of liberty. how wrong this assumption is.
all societies, be they democratic or autocratic, have their own laws. not a single society allows its citizens to do whatever they please. rules, moral or otherwise, are absolutely necessary for the smooth functioning of civil society. the only difference is where each community draws its lines. but lines are drawn everywhere.
in the lead up to the War on Terror, many "experts" opined that muslims seemed to be a fascination with autocracy.
the current trend of dictatorship, monarchy, and tyranny that the muslim world exhibits is not at all in the spirit of the islamic system.
one has only to look at the very early history of the khilafah (caliphate) to understand that Abu Bakr ascended to the leadership, not by usurping power himself, but by concesus. Abu Bakr was selected during at meeting between the muhajireen (muslim emmigrants from mecca) and the ansar (the muslims of medina). Abu Bakr had actually suggested making Umar bin al Khattab or Abu Ubaydah the caliph. However, Umar's suggestion of Abu Bakr stuck and both the muhajireen and the ansar pledged allegiance (bai'ah) to the caliphate of Abu Bakr.
Islam and Intellectual Development
it is well known that the first verse of the quran to be revealed was:
Read, in the name of the Lord who Created
surah 96, verse 1
the first verse of the quran was revealed as an injunction to read. indeed the word 'quran' means recitation.
throughout the pages of quran, there are endless exortations to "read" and "think".
Surely, in this are signs for those who see (or understand or learn the lesson from the sings of Allah)
surah 15, verse 75
Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget to practice it? An ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense?
surah 2, verse 44
we see that the quran also asks many rhetorical questions whose purpose is not to find answers, but rather to invoke thought in readers.
it is also interesting to note that of all the major intellectual achievements to come out of the muslim world, almost all of them, if not all, have come after the advent of islam in that area. men such as al jabbar, khayyam, khwarizmi, avicena (ibn sina), and averroes (ibn rushd) were all equivalent to the nobel laureates of their time. in fact, much of the basis of modern science would be impossible without the works of these men.
if islam had nothing to do with such intellectual development, why is it that wikipedia's list of polymaths or renaissance men is almost completely populated by arabs and persians after the advent of islam (i.e after 630 AD)? (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymath ). no doubt other polymaths of non-muslim origin existed, but the list of arabs, turks, and persians are exclusive to those after the arrival of islam.
much of the work of the muslim academics involved translating the works of the Greek and Roman greats. without this, western civilization would be far different, and might not be considered "civilized" at all. without an emphasis on the importance of education, both islamic and secular, arab, turkish, or persian people would not study the works of greek and latin origins.
Islam and Modernity
much of this subject is covered in the section immediately above. however, a few more points can be made.
there is nothing in the quran or the sunnah which urges muslims to lead a backward or anti-modern life. there is a strong emphasis on evading religious innovations (bid'ah), but nothing which states that computers or the internet is evil and to be avoided.
examples of technology being meshed with religion is of course the muezzin's loudspeaker. no verse of the quran or tenet of islam can be used to outlaw the loudspeaker, and yet loudspeakers are quite modern in the contexts of ancient religions.
in fact, the argument that islam is opposed to electricity or artificial pacemakers is so ridiculous, that i won't even devote any more time to refuting it. should the argument come up, i will address it later on in the thread or elsewhere.
Islam and Humanity
it has been argued that the islamic penal system is archaic and barbaric. before i say anything further, i would like to make two points:
1) the quran never ever stipulates the stoning to death of adulterers
2) the quran never advocates execution for those who leave islam
as far as apostates, or people who convert out of islam, the quran says:
Lo! Those who disbelieve after their profession of belief, and afterward grow violent in disbelief, their repentance will not be accepted. And such are those who are astray. surah 3, verse 90
for the adulterers, this verse:
Quote:
The adulterer and the adulteress, scourge ye each one of them with a hundred stripes. And let not pity for the twain withhold you from obedience to Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of believers witness their punishment.
surah 22, verse 2
the quran is, in the muslim view at least, the only 100% infallible source of scripture. the hadith, no matter how authentic, do not have the infallibility of the quran. therefore, there is strong reason to believe, logically, that stoning to death of adulterers and executing converts are not a part of the islamic system, despite its presence is modern "sharia" law via "authentic" hadith.
couple that with verse 256 in surah 2:
There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error...
and verse 6 from surah 109:
Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion
and verse 6 from surah 109:
Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion
the evidence against talibanis (and islamophobes) is damning. an open and shut case.
the quran does advocate amputating the hands of thieves. it must be noted, that what is considered criminal in the modern sense is not considered criminal under true sharia law. a starving person stealing food is NOT committing a crime, but actually a virtue as Allah has commanded muslims to strive to survive.
those who are deemed mentally handicapped are also not committing crimes. people who are truly committing criminal acts, are the only ones who are punished. and that too, only if there are 4 witnesses never known to tell lies, who saw the crime being committed by the defendant in question. hence achieving a guilty verdict on a case of theft or adultery, should be damn near impossible.
secondly in the extremely rare case that a person should be found guilty, one might argue that chopping off their hand is "barbaric". unless one advocates no punishment at all, all options are barbaric. it is barbaric to keep a person locked up in a cage like an animal even for a few days. it is barbaric to put him or her in a position where they can be raped. faced with those alternatives, i might actually wish to have my hand chopped off.
true barbarism is to steal what does not belong to you for no reason. true barbarism is to get away with it, as most offenders are repeat offenders. true barbarism is a system which executes people who latter are vindicated using DNA evidence. true barbarism is watching you're loved one's killer get away scotch-free because they have the money to hire a big shot attorney. thats true barbarism.
Naffy
The word kāfir implies the meaning "a person who hides or covers" in literal arabic
So shut up you Kafir.
So shut up you Kafir.
Many Islamic words have literal meanings and shariah meanings.
For example wudu literally means brightness but the shariah meaning is ablution. Noone says that if you seem bright you have no need to do the ablution, do they? Do we take the literal meaning or the new shariah meaning? The literal meaning gives connotations, deeper meanings, associations, relationships etc.
edanon
However, if the amount of muslims in the country sky rocketed over time... and threatened to vote for an Islamic party that could introduce sharia law as sovereign, then how would the non-islamic minority react? Would they still uphold democracy? OR is democracy just a sort of dictatorship for liberal western parties to stay in power?
you are correct i think even if this is far fetched because there's such a large diference between the two populations. If Overtime muslim Mp's were plentiful and muslims had lobbying power to influence non-muslim mps and islamic laws were passed then europeans probably wouldn't like it and would try to do something about it. However this would happen so far in the future that there would probably be a different scapegoat to hate and people probably wouldn't have a big issue about shariah etc
roots
- Cars? The Saudi Government banned this due to other Islamic laws and for safety reasons. Women are not allowed to be alone with non Mahrams, women must be veiled in public, it poses a threat to safety.
It is the Saudi culture suited to them, but it is mutually exclusive to Islam
- Opposite of what? All the Muslims after the Prophet were following something known as the Sunnah, an explanation of the Qur'an. Muslims didn't suddenly start following the Sunnah after Bukhari. Do you believe that all the Muslims including the sahaba who the Qur'an praises were misleaded and that this new sect which you follow has it right? You do also realise that they were obeying the Prophets orders and example during his lifetime. Where is the condemnation of this in the Qur'an?
People were following an example of a dead man for two hundred, if you ever studied history, you know how these examples can easily be distorted through Word of mouth
Example: Generation one says 'Oh I heard Robert said black dogs are mysterious animals'
Generation two says 'Robert taught us that black dogs are suspicious'
Generation three 'Robert warned us that black dogs are cruel and evil'
Generation four'OMFG BLACK DOGS ARE THE DEVIL!'
And many hadiths were rejected for this reason, but they were the discretion of Bukhari and the others, why should I place such trust on them
Ive said it before, and I'll say it again, if you find a hadith that contradicts the Quran in any way, whatsoever then surely it is fake.
If it defies modern logic, than its no longer relevant.
However if it is a good piece of advice, such as the 'not to backbite' then you should take heed. If it helps build easy established systems of prayer, then take heed.
But it is the Quran is the final message, and it was written its timelessness purpose. And the following of the Quran is what defines you as a muslim
- What was done to the people of Lot? Yes, they were all killed.
- Are you denying the Caliph as well?
.
The people of Lot did lots of bad stuff, read the the whole story.
Its like saying a murderer was imprisoned because he also lied to his Grandma
What is to deny about Caliphs, at the time of history, they were good useful rulers. But times have changed, we now live in a world where dictatorship is not the ideal
Its a shame that a lot of these secular Muslims are supporting the rule of man and giving preference to it to the laws of Allah. Have they not read the Quran?
Surah Maidah
43. But how do they come to you for decision while they have the Taurat (Torah), in which is the (plain) Decision of Allah; yet even after that, they turn away. For they are not (really) believers.
44. Verily, We did send down the Taurat (Torah) [to Musa (Moses)], therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah's Will, judged the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [too judged the Jews by the Taurat (Torah) after those Prophets] for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's Book, and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me (O Jews) and sell not My Verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafirun (i.e. disbelievers - of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allah's Laws ).
45. And We ordained therein for them: "Life for life , eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal." But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation. And whosoever does not judge by that which Allah has revealed, such are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers - of a lesser degree).
46. And in their footsteps, We sent 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) , confirming the Taurat (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqun (the pious - see V.2:2).
47. Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fasiqun (the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree) to Allah.
48. And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad ) the Book (this Qur'an) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Mohayminan (trustworthy in highness and a witness) over it (old Scriptures) . So judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging away from the truth that has come to you. To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way. If Allah willed, He would have made you one nation, but that (He) may test you in what He has given you; so strive as in a race in good deeds. The return of you (all) is to Allah; then He will inform you about that in which you used to differ.
49. . And so judge (you O Muhammad ) between them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they turn you (O Muhammad ) far away from some of that which Allah has sent down to you. And if they turn away, then know that Allah's Will is to punish them for some sins of theirs. And truly, most of men are Fasiqun (rebellious and disobedient to Allah).
50. Do they then seek the judgement of (the Days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allah for a people who have firm Faith.
Surah An-Nisa
59. O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger (Muhammad ), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger (), if you believe in Allah and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination.
60. Have you seen those (hyprocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taghut (false judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaitan (Satan) wishes to lead them far astray.
61. And when it is said to them: "Come to what Allah has sent down and to the Messenger (Muhammad )," you (Muhammad ) see the hypocrites turn away from you (Muhammad ) with aversion.
62. How then, when a catastrophe befalls them because of what their hands have sent forth, they come to you swearing by Allah, "We meant no more than goodwill and conciliation!"
63. They (hypocrites) are those of whom Allah knows what is in their hearts; so turn aside from them (do not punish them) but admonish them, and speak to them an effective word (i.e. to believe in Allah, worship Him, obey Him, and be afraid of Him) to reach their innerselves.
64. We sent no Messenger, but to be obeyed by Allah's Leave. If they (hypocrites), when they had been unjust to themselves, had come to you (Muhammad ) and begged Allah's Forgiveness, and the Messenger had begged forgiveness for them: indeed, they would have found Allah All-Forgiving (One Who accepts repentance), Most Merciful.
65. But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad ) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission.
Surah An-Nur
47. They (hypocrites) say: "We have believed in Allah and in the Messenger (Muhammad ), and we obey," then a party of them turn away thereafter, such are not believers.
48. And when they are called to Allah (i.e. His Words, the Qur'an) and His Messenger (), to judge between them, lo! a party of them refuse (to come) and turn away.
Surah Maidah
43. But how do they come to you for decision while they have the Taurat (Torah), in which is the (plain) Decision of Allah; yet even after that, they turn away. For they are not (really) believers.
44. Verily, We did send down the Taurat (Torah) [to Musa (Moses)], therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah's Will, judged the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [too judged the Jews by the Taurat (Torah) after those Prophets] for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's Book, and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me (O Jews) and sell not My Verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafirun (i.e. disbelievers - of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allah's Laws ).
45. And We ordained therein for them: "Life for life , eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal." But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation. And whosoever does not judge by that which Allah has revealed, such are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers - of a lesser degree).
46. And in their footsteps, We sent 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) , confirming the Taurat (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqun (the pious - see V.2:2).
47. Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fasiqun (the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree) to Allah.
48. And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad ) the Book (this Qur'an) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Mohayminan (trustworthy in highness and a witness) over it (old Scriptures) . So judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging away from the truth that has come to you. To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way. If Allah willed, He would have made you one nation, but that (He) may test you in what He has given you; so strive as in a race in good deeds. The return of you (all) is to Allah; then He will inform you about that in which you used to differ.
49. . And so judge (you O Muhammad ) between them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they turn you (O Muhammad ) far away from some of that which Allah has sent down to you. And if they turn away, then know that Allah's Will is to punish them for some sins of theirs. And truly, most of men are Fasiqun (rebellious and disobedient to Allah).
50. Do they then seek the judgement of (the Days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allah for a people who have firm Faith.
Surah An-Nisa
59. O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger (Muhammad ), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger (), if you believe in Allah and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination.
60. Have you seen those (hyprocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taghut (false judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaitan (Satan) wishes to lead them far astray.
61. And when it is said to them: "Come to what Allah has sent down and to the Messenger (Muhammad )," you (Muhammad ) see the hypocrites turn away from you (Muhammad ) with aversion.
62. How then, when a catastrophe befalls them because of what their hands have sent forth, they come to you swearing by Allah, "We meant no more than goodwill and conciliation!"
63. They (hypocrites) are those of whom Allah knows what is in their hearts; so turn aside from them (do not punish them) but admonish them, and speak to them an effective word (i.e. to believe in Allah, worship Him, obey Him, and be afraid of Him) to reach their innerselves.
64. We sent no Messenger, but to be obeyed by Allah's Leave. If they (hypocrites), when they had been unjust to themselves, had come to you (Muhammad ) and begged Allah's Forgiveness, and the Messenger had begged forgiveness for them: indeed, they would have found Allah All-Forgiving (One Who accepts repentance), Most Merciful.
65. But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad ) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission.
Surah An-Nur
47. They (hypocrites) say: "We have believed in Allah and in the Messenger (Muhammad ), and we obey," then a party of them turn away thereafter, such are not believers.
48. And when they are called to Allah (i.e. His Words, the Qur'an) and His Messenger (), to judge between them, lo! a party of them refuse (to come) and turn away.
Naffy
People were following an example of a dead man for two hundred, if you ever studied history, you know how these examples can easily be distorted through Word of mouth
People were following an example of a dead man for two hundred, if you ever studied history, you know how these examples can easily be distorted through Word of mouth
You don't take things into account do you?
The Companions didn't fall into a hole all of a sudden. They conveyed his words and deeds. Also Umar didn't allow people to narrate too many hadith. You do realise that only a handful of companions were allowed to give fatwa. That people relied on certain select people to obtain knowledge. You do realise that the Caliphs relied on the words and deeds of the Prophet in addition to the Quran? Do you know this or not?
Example: Generation one says 'Oh I heard Robert said black dogs are mysterious animals'
Generation two says 'Robert taught us that black dogs are suspicious'
Generation three 'Robert warned us that black dogs are cruel and evil'
Generation four'OMFG BLACK DOGS ARE THE DEVIL!'
And many hadiths were rejected for this reason, but they were the discretion of Bukhari and the others, why should I place such trust on them
Generation two says 'Robert taught us that black dogs are suspicious'
Generation three 'Robert warned us that black dogs are cruel and evil'
Generation four'OMFG BLACK DOGS ARE THE DEVIL!'
And many hadiths were rejected for this reason, but they were the discretion of Bukhari and the others, why should I place such trust on them
Perhaps because they are experts in the field and you are not, because their teachers go back to the Companions and their teacher was the Prophet.
Perhaps because they spent their lives sifting through hadith seperating the false from the correct.
Ive said it before, and I'll say it again, if you find a hadith that contradicts the Quran in any way, whatsoever then surely it is fake.
How do you know if something contradicts the Qur'an, have you consulted a tafsir? Have you checked the explanations of the companions? Do you know what it refers to? If it is abrogated?
If it defies modern logic, than its no longer relevant.
Modern logic? Why modern logic?
However if it is a good piece of advice, such as the 'not to backbite' then you should take heed. If it helps build easy established systems of prayer, then take heed.
But it is the Quran is the final message, and it was written its timelessness purpose. And the following of the Quran is what defines you as a muslim
But it is the Quran is the final message, and it was written its timelessness purpose. And the following of the Quran is what defines you as a muslim
Following the Quran means obeying the Prophet or do you reject this command which is found in the Qur'an in numerous places?
Why do you pray the way you do. Is that written in the Qur'an?
The people of Lot did lots of bad stuff, read the the whole story.
Its like saying a murderer was imprisoned because he also lied to his Grandma
What is to deny about Caliphs, at the time of history, they were good useful rulers. But times have changed, we now live in a world where dictatorship is not the ideal
Its like saying a murderer was imprisoned because he also lied to his Grandma
What is to deny about Caliphs, at the time of history, they were good useful rulers. But times have changed, we now live in a world where dictatorship is not the ideal
They were destroyed because they refused to listen to their messenger when he told them to stop.
These are the parts of your post which show your defeatist attitude: (You will never please these people trust me, they want more and more, you will never force Islaam into their hearts, it is Allah who guides, trust me i've put a heck of a lot more effort trying to present Islaam in a way which makes it seem attractive to them but why should i risk Allah's anger by going over the limit in making it attractive to them by changing its laws)
But times have changed, we now live in a world where dictatorship is not the ideal
I didn't know that we can change the deen over time to appease and please the disbelievers. I didn't realise that we may reject the words of God and decide to do as we please.
If it defies modern logic, than its no longer relevant.
roots
Why do you pray the way you do. Is that written in the Qur'an?
Why do you pray the way you do. Is that written in the Qur'an?
Can you honestly speak for God and know what type of prayer he accepts or not.
At the end of the day, we will be judged for our deeds and be hold accountable.
Im going to use a hadith here
'It is the intent that is measured, rather than the deed'
(not the exact words)
Naffy
Can you honestly speak for God and know what type of prayer he accepts or not.
At the end of the day, we will be judged for our deeds and be hold accountable.
Im going to use a hadith here
'It is the intent that is measured, rather than the deed'
(not the exact words)
At the end of the day, we will be judged for our deeds and be hold accountable.
Im going to use a hadith here
'It is the intent that is measured, rather than the deed'
(not the exact words)
That means that there is no use doing something if the intention is wrong. Both the intention and the action have to be correct.
It does not however mean that you may do what you like but keep a hopeful intention.
It's funny how there is another thread on about America supporting dictatorships in other countries, in particular relevance to Muslim countries and yet the OP in this thread is clearly making exaggerated claims about the 'Islamifcation of UK' and the end of democracy- the very democracy supposedly being infiltrated in other oil-rich Middle Eastern countries.
Annoying-Mouse
What? I only cut and paste a little bit for verses and such. Google search it if you want.
I did. And it's as stupid on other sites as it is after you copy it. Neither did it have any relevance to my response to you and is simply just furthering your unfounded attacks on all Muslims.
Anyway, I was explaining the role of that group. They have specifically stated that is there plan. Whether or not they will succeeded is another topic.
Which group? I ask seriously because which 'secretive conspiracy group' soughts to achieve power through deceptive measures and then publishes them openly?
And why do you feel the need to write utterly irrelevant 'holier-than-thou' self-righteous concluding statements about "whether or not they will succeed..." (note spelling) when I never eluded to whether they would in any way!
You've successfully dug a massive whole for yourself in this thread and your intentional attempts to evade the questions we legitimately ask aren't going down well either. Fail tbh.
Annoying-Mouse
Freedom of sexuality in Islam:
Four schools of jurisprudence believe, that homosexuality carries the same punishment as adultery or pre-martial sex. Adultery and pre-martial sex carry the death penalty.
Freedom of religion in Islam:
The Sharia believes carries a theocracy. In certain democratic nations, treason carries the death penalty. have committed treason against the people. In a theocracy apostasies have committed treason against God and thus are punishable by death as agreed with the four schools of jurisprudence.
Freedom of speech in Islam:
In a Islamic state freedom of speech is relatively small. It disallows bad mouthing the Caliph (government), prophet or Allah, it disallows preaching of any other religion.
"The Qur'an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorized as an unbeliever. The Judgment of the unbeliever is that he is killed. [...] There is a difference between ... harming Allah and His Messenger and harming the believers. Injuring the believers, short of murder, incurs beating and exemplary punishment. The judgment against those who harm Allah and His Prophet is more severe – the death penalty.
Secularity and Islam:
The four schools of though all believe in the Sharaia and against secularity. A Muslim that tries to implement mans law instead of God has committed treason and is punishable by death.
Democracy and Islam:
Islam doesn’t do what the people tell it to do, it does what God tells it to do. If a caliph is strong and adheres to the Sharia fully, no matter how liberal the people have become he will not change the laws.
Mawsoo’at al-Adyaan wa’l-Madhaahib al-Mu’aasirah (2/1066, 1067):
Undoubtedly the democratic system is one of the modern forms of shirk, in terms of obedience and following, or legislation, as it denies the sovereignty of the Creator and His absolute right to issue laws, and ascribes that right to human beings. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged) — you and your fathers — for which Allaah has sent down no authority. The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allaah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism); that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not”
[Yoosuf 12:40]
“The decision is only for Allaah”
Muslims in parliament:
Liberal muslims in parliament are not allowed. You cannot be a Muslim and be in parliament and leave the laws as it is.
“he one who understands the true nature of the democratic system and the ruling thereon, then he nominates himself or someone else (for election) is approving of this system, and is working with it, is in grave danger, because the democratic system is contrary to Islam and approving of it and participating in it are actions that imply apostasy and being beyond the pale of Islam. “
However, just as the way the people in that show Islamic republic of Britain, they are alright. They are fighting with Allah and not against him. This is because they are allowed to join secular parties and such and reduce the evil (illegalize homosexuality, introduce blasphemy laws, introduce the Sharia). Islam is compatible with democracy only to fight democracy.
“But as for the one who nominates himself or nominates others in this system in order to join the parliament and enjoin good and forbid evil, and establish proof against them, and reduce its evil and corruption as much as he can, so that people of corruption and disbelievers in Allaah will not have free rein to spread mischief in the land and spoil people’s worldly interests and religious commitment, this is a matter that is subject to ijtihaad, according to the interests that it is hoped will be served by that.”
If he has the power to change the corruption of the UK, he must change it. The reason being is stated by the Prophet Mohamed. Which you can not try and deny:
On the authority of Abu Saeed Al-Khurdari, who said: I heard the messenger of Allah say:
"Whosoever of you sees an evil action, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart; and that is the weakest of faith."
And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If the people see an evil and do not change it, soon Allaah will punish them all.”
Muslims in Britain:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality
No Muslims approved of homosexuality. Don’t say the article is spouting rubbish because in comparison 35% French Muslims approved of homosexuality.
Muslims have to put their religion first and their country second. I know many Muslims, I used to be one. You are right many of them are against apostasies dyeing and such, but is this a good thing? Why are you cherry picking your religion? I would rather have loyal Muslims who follow their religion, than liberal Muslims who cherry pick it.
Please, learn your religion. Don’t be half hearted. Be proud to be a Muslim, don’t try a new PR strategy just to get westerners to like you. Does their love mean so much to you that you would sacrifice getting Allahs hate?
I respect Muslims who abide by their religion, than those who interpret in such a way to satisfy others. I am not saying I respect Muslims such as Al-Qadea, I respect Muslims who are not afraid to speak out the punishment for blasphemy or apostasies.
Of course, I am trying to tell Muslims to support Islamism. Islamism the political side of Islam, basically the Sharia. Would you rather support labor or any other democratic government than a Islamist party? Why do you believe Islam is only for spiritual matters and it is a private thing? Islam unlike Christianity affects all your life. It has a economical, political, social and philosophical concepts. It is a way of life. Why don’t you follow it?
If you reply, please reply with quotation and verses from the Quran to justify your explanations. Please, don’t just inform of your opinion. I have informed of my opinion on what I believe Muslims should do and I have provided quotations and such to back it up. I already know the liberal viewpoint, because I adhered to it one time.
What is so good about being a moderate? Why can’t you be a Muslim? Are you scared of the way people may view you if you spoke about Islam in its purest form? Do you want Islam to become like Christianity all liberal and ****? Really? In my view, I moderate Muslim is like a moderate BNP member. The BNP aren’t racist look we are letting people of all ethnicities to come in. The BNP aren’t neo-Nazis we adore Churchill.
In addition, why do you think you are better interpreting than scholars? Scholars who have devoted their whole life into studying Islam. Everything they do, they do with the mind set of Islam. Me and You properly commit more sins and thus not better qualified to speak on such a matter. Which opinion would you regard better? A freshman GCSE student studying philosophy or Sir Karl Raimund Popper? And why?
Finally, seeing as you are studying law. I was mistaken when I said universal laws should be implemented you are right. They can’t, a prime Minster has the power to change these. But, is it not possible to implement certain criteria’s a party must adhere to and if they do not they can not be elected because they are officially not a party of the UK as for they haven‘t met the criteria to be considered a party? But, I think it is a waste of time. The research that you made me do shows that a Muslims are allowed to pretend to follow the party and like it but really if he gets elected he would change it, so pretty pointless.
A muslim MUST want the Sharia. Does a labour supporter want a labour government to run Britain? Does a communist want a communist Britain? Does a Nazi want a Nazi Britain? Does the Nazi want Nazism only in the country of origin Germany or worldwide?
How do you know what the average Muslim wants? I know because I have researched Islam briefly. I have seen that a Muslim should want gay people to be executed. It has been stated in the Quran about the stories of Gods wrath on gay people and all four schools of thoughts agree that capital punishment is necessary. Notice how I say should, I know most of them don’t but is this a good thing for them? It is good for me and you but is it for them? Muslims shouldn’t publicly announce their hatred. This is because their beloved prophet stated:
On the authority of Abu Saeed Al-Khurdari, who said: I heard the messenger of Allah say:
"Whosoever of you sees an evil action, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart; and that is the weakest of faith."
So, just know next time you see a Muslim and he is looking at gay people kissing (evil sin according to Islam) he should be secretly hating them, as for he doesn’t have the power to express his views as it could lead to an arrest or stop it from happening.
Islam is a political, economical, social, philosophical, jurisprudence and spiritual. I have to follow the economical side of Islam if I am an economist. I must follow the philosophical side of Islam, if I am a philosopher. I must follow the political side of Islam, if I am a politician. I must follow the Islamic jurisprudence, if I am a lawyer. Islam is not a personal thing. You should embrace to the full extent and try help other embrace it to.
For example in the philosophical side of Islam , a Muslim shouldn’t take the view point, “I think therefore I am”. He takes the viewpoint, I heard (from the Quran and prophet Mohamed) that I was created, therefore I am created. The reason being is explained in this quote:
"The saying of the faithful believers
when they are called to Allah (His
Words-the Qur'an) and His Messenger
(PBUH) to judge between them is only
that they say: 'We hear and we obey.'
And such are the successful (who will
live for ever in Aj-Jannah)." (Qur'an 24: 51-52)
And why not? I am a communist. I adhere to communism. I love communism. I bought a big 20 bedroom mansion. Am I a hypocrites? A catholic who is a pro-choice rather than pro-life is a hypocrite.
I am tired of hearing such phrases. Look at the does your religion cause you to be homophobic thread. It states that he has a friend she is female, she is supposedly a devout Muslim but hangs around with boys and homosexuals? How can a devoted Muslim do that? Isn’t that kind of like Stalin buying a big house and many cars? Or Hitler praising the Jews? It is an oxymoronic statement. A Muslim should want to impose the Sharia globally. It is a Muslim duty to spread the word of God. The word of God contains a political aspects thus must promote that to.
I am pretty sure if I explained to any of the Muslims you claim to believe in a theocracy they would. I would just say:
“You are a Muslim right?”
“ You believe in a higher power, right?”
“You very own existence is to please this higher power, right?”
“You here and obey, right?”
“You believe God over humans, right?”
“You believe Gods opinion is better than humans, right?”
“You are not a hypocrite, right?”
“Why are you disregarding Gods viewpoint on cutting the thief’s hand, just because humans have claimed they don’t want it?”
If he replies with, I don’t. Then I state:
“ Why believe in a democracy than?”
It kind of does. The reason being is which opinion would you regard higher:
A) GCSE philosophy
B) Dan Dennett
Why?
I am not telling you what to do. I am trying to help you. I am stating what your religion told you to do. I am trying to help save your soul so that you may reach heaven. Don’t you want to reach it?
Also yes, you do need to be religious in order to know if someone is generalizing. If you stated that all Nazis are facisit and he said that’s generalizing what would you say? This guy is a Nazi that lives in America and is a liberal Nazi. He doesn’t adhere to his political beliefs fully. But, Hitler for example adheres to his political belief to the full extent and thus know when someone is generalizing or not. Its kind of like calling communist, communist and them replying some of us are capitalist actually, it is ******* oxymoronic.
Please, can you explain why it is a mega face palm? A Muslim should not be a supporter of democracy, secularity and freedom of ; speech (blasphemy and preaching of other religions), sexuality and religion. If you are a Muslim, why should I take your view more than a scholar who has devoted his whole life to Islam and finding the truth and interpreting it the right way? If you can’t even follow the requirement of not listening to music or promoting it (your sig) I don’t want to hear your view. It is like me taking a closed minded philosophers view, the basic essence of philosophy is to stay open minded.
A Muslim is not supposed democracy. Would you like the law to revolve around what the people think or what Allah and his messenger thinks? A Muslim is not supposed like secularity. Would you like to just let everyone commit harem, or would you try and get justice for the grievous sin they have committed? A Muslim is not supposed to like freedom of speech (blasphemy and preaching of other religions). Would you like people to curse Allah and his messengers or would you like to see justice triumph on this human being?
I am not bragging. It is called stating facts. If you can’t handle some of the views of your religion, why follow it?
The amount of neg reps I have gotten from Muslims
. Please, instead of neg repping me, argue. Why can you not accept Islam is not the most peaceful religion? It never claimed to be. It claimed to be a religion that lets justice triumph?
Correct me if I have stated anything wrong. Thanks.
I was wondering, is it just me who noticed it seems as if he is talking about the decline of Muslims practicing their religion like a good thing? I mean he is talking about never wanting the Sharia law? Escaping the Sharia law? He believes that Gods viewpoint on certain things, are less important than the viewpoint of fellow human beings. He regards their opinion very highly. I mean, ‘adapting better with western society’? Why is that a good thing? Why is the rise of atheism a good thing for a Muslim? Why is being more liberal a good thing for a Muslim? It just shows how much of a sheep they are, they just quickly adapt to the new society and forget about their priority. They believe in an after life yet care about what the westerners will see them as for the 100-150 years they will live? It confuses me? They would rather have 100-150 years of love from the westerners than infinite years in heaven from Allah. I feel sorry for the future generation Muslim, they are being robbed of the true image of Islam.
Do you see the west adapting? Did they adapt when they conquer countries? Do they not keep their own morals because they regard their morals more higher? Why can’t Muslims regard their morals higher?
Four schools of jurisprudence believe, that homosexuality carries the same punishment as adultery or pre-martial sex. Adultery and pre-martial sex carry the death penalty.
Freedom of religion in Islam:
The Sharia believes carries a theocracy. In certain democratic nations, treason carries the death penalty. have committed treason against the people. In a theocracy apostasies have committed treason against God and thus are punishable by death as agreed with the four schools of jurisprudence.
Freedom of speech in Islam:
In a Islamic state freedom of speech is relatively small. It disallows bad mouthing the Caliph (government), prophet or Allah, it disallows preaching of any other religion.
"The Qur'an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorized as an unbeliever. The Judgment of the unbeliever is that he is killed. [...] There is a difference between ... harming Allah and His Messenger and harming the believers. Injuring the believers, short of murder, incurs beating and exemplary punishment. The judgment against those who harm Allah and His Prophet is more severe – the death penalty.
Secularity and Islam:
The four schools of though all believe in the Sharaia and against secularity. A Muslim that tries to implement mans law instead of God has committed treason and is punishable by death.
Democracy and Islam:
Islam doesn’t do what the people tell it to do, it does what God tells it to do. If a caliph is strong and adheres to the Sharia fully, no matter how liberal the people have become he will not change the laws.
Mawsoo’at al-Adyaan wa’l-Madhaahib al-Mu’aasirah (2/1066, 1067):
Undoubtedly the democratic system is one of the modern forms of shirk, in terms of obedience and following, or legislation, as it denies the sovereignty of the Creator and His absolute right to issue laws, and ascribes that right to human beings. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged) — you and your fathers — for which Allaah has sent down no authority. The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allaah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism); that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not”
[Yoosuf 12:40]
“The decision is only for Allaah”
Muslims in parliament:
Liberal muslims in parliament are not allowed. You cannot be a Muslim and be in parliament and leave the laws as it is.
“he one who understands the true nature of the democratic system and the ruling thereon, then he nominates himself or someone else (for election) is approving of this system, and is working with it, is in grave danger, because the democratic system is contrary to Islam and approving of it and participating in it are actions that imply apostasy and being beyond the pale of Islam. “
However, just as the way the people in that show Islamic republic of Britain, they are alright. They are fighting with Allah and not against him. This is because they are allowed to join secular parties and such and reduce the evil (illegalize homosexuality, introduce blasphemy laws, introduce the Sharia). Islam is compatible with democracy only to fight democracy.
“But as for the one who nominates himself or nominates others in this system in order to join the parliament and enjoin good and forbid evil, and establish proof against them, and reduce its evil and corruption as much as he can, so that people of corruption and disbelievers in Allaah will not have free rein to spread mischief in the land and spoil people’s worldly interests and religious commitment, this is a matter that is subject to ijtihaad, according to the interests that it is hoped will be served by that.”
If he has the power to change the corruption of the UK, he must change it. The reason being is stated by the Prophet Mohamed. Which you can not try and deny:
On the authority of Abu Saeed Al-Khurdari, who said: I heard the messenger of Allah say:
"Whosoever of you sees an evil action, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart; and that is the weakest of faith."
And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If the people see an evil and do not change it, soon Allaah will punish them all.”
Muslims in Britain:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality
No Muslims approved of homosexuality. Don’t say the article is spouting rubbish because in comparison 35% French Muslims approved of homosexuality.
Muslims have to put their religion first and their country second. I know many Muslims, I used to be one. You are right many of them are against apostasies dyeing and such, but is this a good thing? Why are you cherry picking your religion? I would rather have loyal Muslims who follow their religion, than liberal Muslims who cherry pick it.
Please, learn your religion. Don’t be half hearted. Be proud to be a Muslim, don’t try a new PR strategy just to get westerners to like you. Does their love mean so much to you that you would sacrifice getting Allahs hate?
I respect Muslims who abide by their religion, than those who interpret in such a way to satisfy others. I am not saying I respect Muslims such as Al-Qadea, I respect Muslims who are not afraid to speak out the punishment for blasphemy or apostasies.
Of course, I am trying to tell Muslims to support Islamism. Islamism the political side of Islam, basically the Sharia. Would you rather support labor or any other democratic government than a Islamist party? Why do you believe Islam is only for spiritual matters and it is a private thing? Islam unlike Christianity affects all your life. It has a economical, political, social and philosophical concepts. It is a way of life. Why don’t you follow it?
If you reply, please reply with quotation and verses from the Quran to justify your explanations. Please, don’t just inform of your opinion. I have informed of my opinion on what I believe Muslims should do and I have provided quotations and such to back it up. I already know the liberal viewpoint, because I adhered to it one time.
What is so good about being a moderate? Why can’t you be a Muslim? Are you scared of the way people may view you if you spoke about Islam in its purest form? Do you want Islam to become like Christianity all liberal and ****? Really? In my view, I moderate Muslim is like a moderate BNP member. The BNP aren’t racist look we are letting people of all ethnicities to come in. The BNP aren’t neo-Nazis we adore Churchill.
In addition, why do you think you are better interpreting than scholars? Scholars who have devoted their whole life into studying Islam. Everything they do, they do with the mind set of Islam. Me and You properly commit more sins and thus not better qualified to speak on such a matter. Which opinion would you regard better? A freshman GCSE student studying philosophy or Sir Karl Raimund Popper? And why?
Finally, seeing as you are studying law. I was mistaken when I said universal laws should be implemented you are right. They can’t, a prime Minster has the power to change these. But, is it not possible to implement certain criteria’s a party must adhere to and if they do not they can not be elected because they are officially not a party of the UK as for they haven‘t met the criteria to be considered a party? But, I think it is a waste of time. The research that you made me do shows that a Muslims are allowed to pretend to follow the party and like it but really if he gets elected he would change it, so pretty pointless.
A muslim MUST want the Sharia. Does a labour supporter want a labour government to run Britain? Does a communist want a communist Britain? Does a Nazi want a Nazi Britain? Does the Nazi want Nazism only in the country of origin Germany or worldwide?
How do you know what the average Muslim wants? I know because I have researched Islam briefly. I have seen that a Muslim should want gay people to be executed. It has been stated in the Quran about the stories of Gods wrath on gay people and all four schools of thoughts agree that capital punishment is necessary. Notice how I say should, I know most of them don’t but is this a good thing for them? It is good for me and you but is it for them? Muslims shouldn’t publicly announce their hatred. This is because their beloved prophet stated:
On the authority of Abu Saeed Al-Khurdari, who said: I heard the messenger of Allah say:
"Whosoever of you sees an evil action, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart; and that is the weakest of faith."
So, just know next time you see a Muslim and he is looking at gay people kissing (evil sin according to Islam) he should be secretly hating them, as for he doesn’t have the power to express his views as it could lead to an arrest or stop it from happening.
Islam is a political, economical, social, philosophical, jurisprudence and spiritual. I have to follow the economical side of Islam if I am an economist. I must follow the philosophical side of Islam, if I am a philosopher. I must follow the political side of Islam, if I am a politician. I must follow the Islamic jurisprudence, if I am a lawyer. Islam is not a personal thing. You should embrace to the full extent and try help other embrace it to.
For example in the philosophical side of Islam , a Muslim shouldn’t take the view point, “I think therefore I am”. He takes the viewpoint, I heard (from the Quran and prophet Mohamed) that I was created, therefore I am created. The reason being is explained in this quote:
"The saying of the faithful believers
when they are called to Allah (His
Words-the Qur'an) and His Messenger
(PBUH) to judge between them is only
that they say: 'We hear and we obey.'
And such are the successful (who will
live for ever in Aj-Jannah)." (Qur'an 24: 51-52)
And why not? I am a communist. I adhere to communism. I love communism. I bought a big 20 bedroom mansion. Am I a hypocrites? A catholic who is a pro-choice rather than pro-life is a hypocrite.
I am tired of hearing such phrases. Look at the does your religion cause you to be homophobic thread. It states that he has a friend she is female, she is supposedly a devout Muslim but hangs around with boys and homosexuals? How can a devoted Muslim do that? Isn’t that kind of like Stalin buying a big house and many cars? Or Hitler praising the Jews? It is an oxymoronic statement. A Muslim should want to impose the Sharia globally. It is a Muslim duty to spread the word of God. The word of God contains a political aspects thus must promote that to.
I am pretty sure if I explained to any of the Muslims you claim to believe in a theocracy they would. I would just say:
“You are a Muslim right?”
“ You believe in a higher power, right?”
“You very own existence is to please this higher power, right?”
“You here and obey, right?”
“You believe God over humans, right?”
“You believe Gods opinion is better than humans, right?”
“You are not a hypocrite, right?”
“Why are you disregarding Gods viewpoint on cutting the thief’s hand, just because humans have claimed they don’t want it?”
If he replies with, I don’t. Then I state:
“ Why believe in a democracy than?”
It kind of does. The reason being is which opinion would you regard higher:
A) GCSE philosophy
B) Dan Dennett
Why?
I am not telling you what to do. I am trying to help you. I am stating what your religion told you to do. I am trying to help save your soul so that you may reach heaven. Don’t you want to reach it?
Also yes, you do need to be religious in order to know if someone is generalizing. If you stated that all Nazis are facisit and he said that’s generalizing what would you say? This guy is a Nazi that lives in America and is a liberal Nazi. He doesn’t adhere to his political beliefs fully. But, Hitler for example adheres to his political belief to the full extent and thus know when someone is generalizing or not. Its kind of like calling communist, communist and them replying some of us are capitalist actually, it is ******* oxymoronic.
Please, can you explain why it is a mega face palm? A Muslim should not be a supporter of democracy, secularity and freedom of ; speech (blasphemy and preaching of other religions), sexuality and religion. If you are a Muslim, why should I take your view more than a scholar who has devoted his whole life to Islam and finding the truth and interpreting it the right way? If you can’t even follow the requirement of not listening to music or promoting it (your sig) I don’t want to hear your view. It is like me taking a closed minded philosophers view, the basic essence of philosophy is to stay open minded.
A Muslim is not supposed democracy. Would you like the law to revolve around what the people think or what Allah and his messenger thinks? A Muslim is not supposed like secularity. Would you like to just let everyone commit harem, or would you try and get justice for the grievous sin they have committed? A Muslim is not supposed to like freedom of speech (blasphemy and preaching of other religions). Would you like people to curse Allah and his messengers or would you like to see justice triumph on this human being?
I am not bragging. It is called stating facts. If you can’t handle some of the views of your religion, why follow it?
The amount of neg reps I have gotten from Muslims
. Please, instead of neg repping me, argue. Why can you not accept Islam is not the most peaceful religion? It never claimed to be. It claimed to be a religion that lets justice triumph? Correct me if I have stated anything wrong. Thanks.
I was wondering, is it just me who noticed it seems as if he is talking about the decline of Muslims practicing their religion like a good thing? I mean he is talking about never wanting the Sharia law? Escaping the Sharia law? He believes that Gods viewpoint on certain things, are less important than the viewpoint of fellow human beings. He regards their opinion very highly. I mean, ‘adapting better with western society’? Why is that a good thing? Why is the rise of atheism a good thing for a Muslim? Why is being more liberal a good thing for a Muslim? It just shows how much of a sheep they are, they just quickly adapt to the new society and forget about their priority. They believe in an after life yet care about what the westerners will see them as for the 100-150 years they will live? It confuses me? They would rather have 100-150 years of love from the westerners than infinite years in heaven from Allah. I feel sorry for the future generation Muslim, they are being robbed of the true image of Islam.
Do you see the west adapting? Did they adapt when they conquer countries? Do they not keep their own morals because they regard their morals more higher? Why can’t Muslims regard their morals higher?
Whatever mate....I dont like you because you like to push your views in people's faces and you're rude....secondly, like you care about whether i go to heaven or not....you dont even think it exists...muppet.... dont quote me again...
Sine
Whatever mate....I dont like you because you like to push your views in people's faces and you're rude....secondly, like you care about whether i go to heaven or not....you dont even think it exists...muppet.... dont quote me again...
But don't you believe in it though? If someone believes smoking is against there belief, I don't help them commit a sinful act. I am a tolerant guy and I am not rude. I justify my points/views. If you don't agree with it challenge it, don't be immature about it.
Related discussions
- Your Perfect Country
- Geert Wilders's far-right PVV wins most seats in Dutch election
- 2023 OCR A-level History
- Unpopular opinions
- Essay Competition Questions
- Participation crisis essay
- could someone mark this politics edexcel alevel essay please?
- Politics edexcel alevel 2023 predictions
- History NEA question for the coursework
- Should i vote Labour?
- Bath vs Glasgow
- Official University of Leicester - Talk to Clearing Student - Thread
- Higher English Persuasive Essay Suggestions?
- Uni of Bristol - snobs?
- Edexcel A-level Politics Paper 1 (9PL0 01) - 23rd May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- AQA A-Level Politics Paper 2 - 7152/2 7 June 2023 [Exam chat]
- I need responses for my dissertation survey! please fill
- Classic Civilization A-level
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3B: 9PL0 3B - 17 June 2022 [Exam Chat]
- politics essay help please
Latest
Last reply 4 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 13 minutes ago
Official University of St Andrews Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 21 minutes ago
Official Veterinary Medicine Applicants thread 2024 entryLast reply 30 minutes ago
BAE systems degree apprenticeships September 2024Last reply 53 minutes ago
What is the difference between ejusdem generis and noscitur a sociis?Last reply 54 minutes ago
Risus eget quam volutpat nisl in. Posuere mauris quam quis interdum vestibulum. Sed pLast reply 59 minutes ago
Durham vs Exeter Finance/AccountingTrending
Last reply 11 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 14 hours ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 16 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 11 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 14 hours ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 16 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
