Islam/Muslim Discussion Thread ٢

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Eh, more like NS mind reading.

So that's a thing. Wow. Just like I suspected it to be.

>w< lol

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Hey, hey,I got something up my sleeve that'll trigger him........
I'M AN ISLAMIST!!!
But seriously, I do support moderate Islamism.

Same here. We shouldn't completely disregard the Sharia law.

Yep

[Free Rhenish States]

Same here. We shouldn't completely disregard the Sharia law.

Yep

Hey, I'm off to bed, see you later, brother.^^

[Kubumba Tribe]

Yep

Hey, I'm off to bed, see you later, brother.^^

Bed? It's 2:52 - well, that where I live. What time is it over there?
See ya akhi, may Allah (SWT) bless you.

[Free Rhenish States]

Hey, I'm off to bed, see you later, brother.^^

Bed? It's 2:52 - well, that where I live. What time is it over there?
See ya akhi, may Allah (SWT) bless you.

00:54
Thanks. Cya later.

[Camaalbakrius]

Ignorant of what? Just how violent and disgusting the qu'ran really is and the people who take that shit literally?

Against the background of the actual Quran verses that actually prove it isn't violent?
Of course, why need to cure one's ignorance? It robs one of their "ebil Muslim" demagogy.

Nothing much, really.

Ahhh, I see. Hope you aren't angry at me for my previous post to you. I didn't mean it that way, but I was tired after a long debate with a friend. I apologize ^^

Please, i'm not one to hold grudges. I'm not angry with you, I respect any thoughts you have about anything, whether I agree with it or not

[Alsheb]

What do you guys think of the fact that people say isis is not islamic when they follow islam to the letter?

Come again?

Seriously, reading the actual events of Muhammad's struggle against the Quraysh and Meccan aristocracy, the only thing that struck me was how forgiving and easy-going the Prophet actually was when it came to warfare. Like, seriously, at times it seems like he was plain naive. I mean, signing a peace treaty when you stand at the gates of Mecca? Taking the city without bloodshed and not even executing or even imprisoning any of the oppressive oligarchs who massacred so many of your friends in the years prior?

I mean dang, that takes some self-control and divine inspiration to not resort to retaliatory violence.

[Alsheb]

Sorry, I missed that bit.
Thank you :*

Hey, hey,I got something up my sleeve that'll trigger him........
I'M AN ISLAMIST!!!
But seriously, I do support moderate Islamism.

Islamism can mean so many things nowadays, unfortunately.
But yeah, in the meaning of building society along Qur'anic commandments, I could definitely support islamism as well.

[White Chrobatia]

What's everybody's opinion on Shari'a Law?

[Alsheb]

What's everybody's opinion on Shari'a Law?

Shariah law is usually applied to all Muslims wherever possible (hence usually not to Muslims living in a majority non-Muslim state), and is based of Qur'anic commandments and laws. Ideally, every Muslim should be subjected to one form of Shariah law or the other.

Thing is, there is no such thing as a unified Shariah law, so the details differ per branch of Islam, fiqh and madhab that the majority of Muslims in a state follow.

[White Chrobatia]

What's everybody's opinion on Shari'a Law?

Shariah law is usually applied to all Muslims wherever possible (hence usually not to Muslims living in a majority non-Muslim state), and is based of Qur'anic commandments and laws. Ideally, every Muslim should be subjected to one form of Shariah law or the other.

Thing is, there is no such thing as a unified Shariah law, so the details differ per branch of Islam, fiqh and madhab that the majority of Muslims in a state follow.

My problem with that, of course, is its tendency to be quite sexist. I don't consider myself islamophobic by any means, but do you think there's a coincidence in the fact that the very same countries that apply Shari'a Law (for example, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE.) also have horrid records of how they treat women?

[Alsheb]

Shariah law is usually applied to all Muslims wherever possible (hence usually not to Muslims living in a majority non-Muslim state), and is based of Qur'anic commandments and laws. Ideally, every Muslim should be subjected to one form of Shariah law or the other.

Thing is, there is no such thing as a unified Shariah law, so the details differ per branch of Islam, fiqh and madhab that the majority of Muslims in a state follow.

My problem with that, of course, is its tendency to be quite sexist. I don't consider myself islamophobic by any means, but do you think there's a coincidence in the fact that the very same countries that apply Shari'a Law (for example, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE.) also have horrid records of how they treat women?

Actually, it would be wrong to list those few countries as "countries that apply Shariah law". Case in point, I live in Malaysia, quite a modern and religiously tolerant country, and also here all Muslims are subjected to Shariah law. In fact, there are very few Islamic countries that do not apply Shariah law to its Muslim citizens.
The issue with countries like Saudi Arabia is not so much the fact that they use Shariah law, but the interpretations they give to it, and the often ridiculous conclusions they tend to derive from Islamic scripture.

[White Chrobatia]

My problem with that, of course, is its tendency to be quite sexist. I don't consider myself islamophobic by any means, but do you think there's a coincidence in the fact that the very same countries that apply Shari'a Law (for example, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE.) also have horrid records of how they treat women?

Actually, it would be wrong to list those few countries as "countries that apply Shariah law". Case in point, I live in Malaysia, quite a modern and religiously tolerant country, and also here all Muslims are subjected to Shariah law. In fact, there are very few Islamic countries that do not apply Shariah law to its Muslim citizens.
The issue with countries like Saudi Arabia is not so much the fact that they use Shariah law, but the interpretations they give to it, and the often ridiculous conclusions they tend to derive from Islamic scripture.

But then if some branches are so radical and so poorly implemented while others are not, why isn't there some sort of unified Shari'a Law? And even if there was, who would be the one to enforce it if it isn't being practiced correctly or tolerantly?

[Alsheb]

Actually, it would be wrong to list those few countries as "countries that apply Shariah law". Case in point, I live in Malaysia, quite a modern and religiously tolerant country, and also here all Muslims are subjected to Shariah law. In fact, there are very few Islamic countries that do not apply Shariah law to its Muslim citizens.
The issue with countries like Saudi Arabia is not so much the fact that they use Shariah law, but the interpretations they give to it, and the often ridiculous conclusions they tend to derive from Islamic scripture.

But then if some branches are so radical and so poorly implemented while others are not, why isn't there some sort of unified Shari'a Law? And even if there was, who would be the one to enforce it if it isn't being practiced correctly or tolerantly?

That's just the thing: Islam does not have a Pope-like figure to enforce the "one and only" true form of Islam. It's in the Qur'an, it's up to us to read and understand it. Many will err, no doubt. But then again, even if you have a unified religious leader, he too can err terribly, as has been shown in history with many a Caliph.

[White Chrobatia]

But then if some branches are so radical and so poorly implemented while others are not, why isn't there some sort of unified Shari'a Law? And even if there was, who would be the one to enforce it if it isn't being practiced correctly or tolerantly?

That's just the thing: Islam does not have a Pope-like figure to enforce the "one and only" true form of Islam. It's in the Qur'an, it's up to us to read and understand it. Many will err, no doubt. But then again, even if you have a unified religious leader, he too can err terribly, as has been shown in history with many a Caliph.

I find it hard to justify a system that's fine sometimes and sexist and homophobic other times, especially when the solution to the sexism and homophobia is "sometimes it'll work, I guess.". I can't consciously support a system of law like that unless there's a surefire way to ensure that all are treated equally under it all the time without exception.

[Alsheb]

That's just the thing: Islam does not have a Pope-like figure to enforce the "one and only" true form of Islam. It's in the Qur'an, it's up to us to read and understand it. Many will err, no doubt. But then again, even if you have a unified religious leader, he too can err terribly, as has been shown in history with many a Caliph.

I find it hard to justify a system that's fine sometimes and sexist and homophobic other times, especially when the solution to the sexism and homophobia is "sometimes it'll work, I guess.". I can't consciously support a system of law like that unless there's a surefire way to ensure that all are treated equally under it all the time without exception.

The sexist and homophobic interpretations tend to be derived from dubious texts and later additions, and have no source in the Qur'an itself. For example, when the Prophet Muhammad forced his followers to include women in inheritance (which was unheard of at the time), he instituted a transition system in which there was a minimum set of what women were at least owed in inheritance.
Later scholars, and even some now, have abused this ruling to say that this minimum is also the legal amount women should always receive, and nothing more. Which is not what the Qur'an says.

Equality is a core principle of Islam, and the unequal measures taken mainly by takfiris is definitely not properly Islamic. Yet unfortunately humans are fallible and prone to sin, and that counts for Muslims too.

[Herskerstad]

I find it hard to justify a system that's fine sometimes and sexist and homophobic other times, especially when the solution to the sexism and homophobia is "sometimes it'll work, I guess.". I can't consciously support a system of law like that unless there's a surefire way to ensure that all are treated equally under it all the time without exception.

The sexist and homophobic interpretations tend to be derived from dubious texts and later additions, and have no source in the Qur'an itself. For example, when the Prophet Muhammad forced his followers to include women in inheritance (which was unheard of at the time), he instituted a transition system in which there was a minimum set of what women were at least owed in inheritance.
Later scholars, and even some now, have abused this ruling to say that this minimum is also the legal amount women should always receive, and nothing more. Which is not what the Qur'an says.

Equality is a core principle of Islam, and the unequal measures taken mainly by takfiris is definitely not properly Islamic. Yet unfortunately humans are fallible and prone to sin, and that counts for Muslims too.

Do you think Muhammad would affirm same sex marriages? Or for that matter leave gays alone?

[Alsheb]

The sexist and homophobic interpretations tend to be derived from dubious texts and later additions, and have no source in the Qur'an itself. For example, when the Prophet Muhammad forced his followers to include women in inheritance (which was unheard of at the time), he instituted a transition system in which there was a minimum set of what women were at least owed in inheritance.
Later scholars, and even some now, have abused this ruling to say that this minimum is also the legal amount women should always receive, and nothing more. Which is not what the Qur'an says.

Equality is a core principle of Islam, and the unequal measures taken mainly by takfiris is definitely not properly Islamic. Yet unfortunately humans are fallible and prone to sin, and that counts for Muslims too.

Do you think Muhammad would affirm same sex marriages? Or for that matter leave gays alone?

The hadiths are contradictory on that, but then again it is often hard to say which ones are trustworthy. I do believe Joch once made a point that the blatantly homophobic hadiths tend to be from untrustworthy sources.

Most importantly is that the Qur'an does not in any way, shape or form forsee in any physical (or non-physical for that matter) punishment for homosexuals. There is but one quote in the Qur'an that by some is interpreted as chastising homosexuals, although others claim it refers to pederasty and the like, but this verse also does not mandate a punishment. So no, basic Qur'anic law does not command a punishment for homosexuals, nor does it list it as a crime.
So that would count as leaving them alone, yes.

[Camaalbakrius]

Do you think Muhammad would affirm same sex marriages? Or for that matter leave gays alone?

The hadiths are contradictory on that, but then again it is often hard to say which ones are trustworthy. I do believe Joch once made a point that the blatantly homophobic hadiths tend to be from untrustworthy sources.

Most importantly is that the Qur'an does not in any way, shape or form forsee in any physical (or non-physical for that matter) punishment for homosexuals. There is but one quote in the Qur'an that by some is interpreted as chastising homosexuals, although others claim it refers to pederasty and the like, but this verse also does not mandate a punishment. So no, basic Qur'anic law does not command a punishment for homosexuals, nor does it list it as a crime.
So that would count as leaving them alone, yes.

Would you say that there is such a things as Radical Islam? I'm wondering because I'm not Muslim, and many people deny any such existence of Radical Islam. So i'm going to ask you all, since really, only you can tell me whether radical islam exists. I can't trust a generalization about Islam made my a non-Muslim.

[Free Rhenish States]

The hadiths are contradictory on that, but then again it is often hard to say which ones are trustworthy. I do believe Joch once made a point that the blatantly homophobic hadiths tend to be from untrustworthy sources.

Most importantly is that the Qur'an does not in any way, shape or form forsee in any physical (or non-physical for that matter) punishment for homosexuals. There is but one quote in the Qur'an that by some is interpreted as chastising homosexuals, although others claim it refers to pederasty and the like, but this verse also does not mandate a punishment. So no, basic Qur'anic law does not command a punishment for homosexuals, nor does it list it as a crime.
So that would count as leaving them alone, yes.

Would you say that there is such a things as Radical Islam? I'm wondering because I'm not Muslim, and many people deny any such existence of Radical Islam. So i'm going to ask you all, since really, only you can tell me whether radical islam exists. I can't trust a generalization about Islam made my a non-Muslim.

I think it does, ISIS is a good example, but is important to understand that "radical Islam" is not the true Islam.

[Camaalbakrius]

Would you say that there is such a things as Radical Islam? I'm wondering because I'm not Muslim, and many people deny any such existence of Radical Islam. So i'm going to ask you all, since really, only you can tell me whether radical islam exists. I can't trust a generalization about Islam made my a non-Muslim.

I think it does, ISIS is a good example, but is important to understand that "radical Islam" is not the true Islam.

I most certainly hope so, as an American. From what I've seen on this thread, I believe you.

So, radical islam is a form of Islam, but you would say that what it teaches is incorrect interpretations of the Qu'ran?

[Free Rhenish States]

I think it does, ISIS is a good example, but is important to understand that "radical Islam" is not the true Islam.

I most certainly hope so, as an American. From what I've seen on this thread, I believe you.

So, radical islam is a form of Islam, but you would say that what it teaches is incorrect interpretations of the Qu'ran?

Yes, groups like ISIS do in fact teach incorrectings of Islam in order to legitimize their wrongdoing. For example, they claim that raping unbelievers is okay, and generally, killing and wrongdoing against the unbelievers, and while a person who isn´t familiar with Islam might find this reasoning as legitimate, think of it, we're not doing it to our people, so it's okay, but in truth, Islam and the Prophet (saw) are against it. In a similar manner, they also kill Muslims and justify it by saying they're not Muslims because they criticize them, again, it might sound true for an incompetent person, but in the real Islam, they are not entitled to give takfir to other people (to give takfir = declare sb an infidel).

[Camaalbakrius]

I most certainly hope so, as an American. From what I've seen on this thread, I believe you.

So, radical islam is a form of Islam, but you would say that what it teaches is incorrect interpretations of the Qu'ran?

Yes, groups like ISIS do in fact teach incorrectings of Islam in order to legitimize their wrongdoing. For example, they claim that raping unbelievers is okay, and generally, killing and wrongdoing against the unbelievers, and while a person who isn´t familiar with Islam might find this reasoning as legitimate, think of it, we're not doing it to our people, so it's okay, but in truth, Islam and the Prophet (saw) are against it. In a similar manner, they also kill Muslims and justify it by saying they're not Muslims because they criticize them, again, it might sound true for an incompetent person, but in the real Islam, they are not entitled to give takfir to other people (to give takfir = declare sb an infidel).

I see. It's quite similar to the witch burnings during the middle ages. Goes to show that all religions have bad histories.

[Free Rhenish States]

Yes, groups like ISIS do in fact teach incorrectings of Islam in order to legitimize their wrongdoing. For example, they claim that raping unbelievers is okay, and generally, killing and wrongdoing against the unbelievers, and while a person who isn´t familiar with Islam might find this reasoning as legitimate, think of it, we're not doing it to our people, so it's okay, but in truth, Islam and the Prophet (saw) are against it. In a similar manner, they also kill Muslims and justify it by saying they're not Muslims because they criticize them, again, it might sound true for an incompetent person, but in the real Islam, they are not entitled to give takfir to other people (to give takfir = declare sb an infidel).

I see. It's quite similar to the witch burnings during the middle ages. Goes to show that all religions have bad histories.

Indeed, friend, nobody is perfect.

[Camaalbakrius]

I see. It's quite similar to the witch burnings during the middle ages. Goes to show that all religions have bad histories.

Indeed, friend, nobody is perfect.

All we can do is make sure that we are not corrupted in the same way that ISIS is in the future. That we can be more tolerant towards each other than in the middle ages. As of now, we can only hope.