Core values.

Bigmo

Does Allah say anything about public goods in the Koran?

Hitler didn't agree with the Koran's prohibition of murder. Degenerates are free to believe whatever they want - that doesn't mean they are free to do whatever they want.

Keyword that.

There is no compulsion in religion. We are not forcing them to hold that the law is good and just. If that was the case, we wouldn't need to punish them.

I am sorry but I don't get your answer and can't follow your logic. What do you mean does the Quran talk about pulic goods.? That has to do with justice since why should some spend on public goods while others don't even when they are enjoying those goods. Its about justice that the Quran does speak of.

I mean did the Quran tells us not to shit and pee on someone's face? Does that mean we can? Thats inflincting some damage and harm on somebody and that is when the Quran allows us to hold others accountable. Two guys deciding to have sex is not anybody's concern. I sense you are not able to tell the difference.

And what does Hitler killing has to do wth all this? The Quran did precribe a punishment for murder.

I have no clue to the last part of what you said also.

neb87

Ok then. If you're a citizen of the country that demands you keep your ****s in your pants unless you're married to the opposite sex, that's a binding oath and law.

Problum?

As an individual, no, I would not have a problem with a law like that since I do that, anyway. As a citizen who respects my fellow citizens' right to live their lives free of tyranny, I would have a problem. This is another strawman.

The law that demands everyone pay taxes is fair in that benefits everyone, equally. We all have to use the roads and we all get to use the parks that taxes pay for. A law that intrudes on some people's right to privacy benefits no one but the minority who are obsessed with what others do with their privates in private. One is clearly unfair and has no place in a free society.

NS

I am sorry but I don't get your answer and can't follow your logic. What do you mean does the Quran talk about pulic goods.? That has to do with justice since why should some spend on public goods while others don't even when they are enjoying those goods. Its about justice that the Quran does speak of.

Justice is extremely subjective. Libertarians would argue that forcing someone to pay for a service is theft and thus unjust.

I mean did the Quran tells us not to shit and pee on someone's face? Does that mean we can?

Exactly my point. You're being a Koranic extremist.

Thats inflincting some damage and harm on somebody and that is when the Quran allows us to hold others accountable.

Unsubstantiated assertion.

And what does Hitler killing has to do wth all this? The Quran did precribe a punishment for murder.

Yes, but telling Hitler that he can't kill 1 million Jews would be compelling him to follow the rules of a religion he doesn't subscribe to.

I have no clue to the last part of what you said also.

Compulsion to believe Compulsion to obey.

NS

As an individual, no, I would not have a problem with a law like that since I do that, anyway. As a citizen who respects my fellow citizens' right to live their lives free of tyranny, I would have a problem. This is another strawman.

Nope. I'm just applying your ethical logic consistently.

The law that demands everyone pay taxes is fair in that benefits everyone, equally. We all have to use the roads and we all get to use the parks that taxes pay for. A law that intrudes on some people's right to privacy benefits no one but the minority who are obsessed with what others do with their privates in private. One is clearly unfair and has no place in a free society.

That's not what you said. You said that whatever the law of the land is, Muslims must obey. Now you've dug yourself into a ditch. laugh

Emil

Vem pratar du med?

Noble Reign............There used to be this member called ParadoxUncreated. A norwegian dude with an IQ of a thousand but very angry with what it seemed the entire world.....I think he was banned from f-m.......or he quit, can't remember
Wonder if he is back as Noble Reign......the comments he is making sounds familiar.

What is your stand on these core values in Islam

Promiscuity-
SHAKIR 415 And as for those who are guilty of an indecency from among your women, call to witnesses against them four (witnesses) from among you; then if they bear witness confine them to the houses until death takes them away or Allah opens some way for them.

When promiscuity takes a turn for the ugly (prostitution) then we are allowed to act. Strangely this only applies to women.....hmmm...Otherwise we should leave it to Allah to judge.

Homophilia -
SHAKIR 37 He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.

Do you believe the story of Lot really happened? Do you believe it actually really did occur that God killed them all, for real?...............Is there a Santa Claus? Or is the story of Lot bringing a message, something that we are supposed to use in our connection with God? Or maybe the story brings a warning that it is very easy to forget God? See the message of the story, people! Don't take an allegorical story and make laws out of it!

Intoxicants-
No need to post verses here......Intoxicants Allowed.........Getting intoxicated Not good if you are weak in your belief, leaving the door open for Satan to step into your mind. Also getting intoxicated Not good if you want to keep your connection (salat) with Allah
Criminality-
That is the strangest so called "core value" I have heard......Not even going to comment.
19-
Interesting- An attempt to mathematically prove that God exists.......Not many followers as far as I understood
Hadith-
Stories collected about what prophet Muhammed did and didnt do......Good reading but it tells more about the Arabs than about prophet Muhammed and the Quran. Bottom line NOT from a divine source, therefore not applicalble as a tool to interpret the Quran.

Noble_Reign

Note that it was God who punished in the example you gave, not humans.

And in your last sentence you said "feel". That is very different from "as per Quran". Further, the law of equivalence is very clear in Quran. To do as you propose would violate it.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Feel free to read and explore the forum and make up your own mind.

Actually "feel" is not different than pr. Quran. Please check verse 30;30 and many verses that deal with immanence. You "law of equivalence" is ambigouous. Indeed God speaks of priveledging someone over others, even in the prayer!

And my mind is made up, first by simply adhering to Gods word, and later also understanding why homophilia is wrong, simply by looking at their culture. And indeed that their cities are destroyed is no mystery.

Peace Be With You.

Noble_Reign

A high iq yes. Well if YOU have some high IQ, does it matter on a forum who says who they are? It really doesn?t does it. Could actually be the siberian shaman, that the christians believe is a saint and called "st claus", typing behind the keyboard. Who is an idolater, and would tell you that there is a foot above sinai, which he saw on LSD, and you would believe it, and go on a rebellious rampage, proud of your new god, after all, deviant people WANT idolatry. So a gift under the pinetree where psychedelic mushrooms grow, could be your new idol, for your own personal pride, and delusion.

Prostitution was also part of what "santa" established, in his idolaterous temples. Temple whores, that was how it was in the olden day. I am sure the deviant miss them ol times.

Ofcourse in Islam, and the society that was established by Abraham, to the praises of God, by all intelligent people, above the level of dogs, promiscuity is bad, and in The Quran, Satan follows his desire (lust).

That you think sodom and gomorra, are the allergorical verses, is simply ridicolous. God is in everyone, everyone in mental anguish prays to God, the suffering gays, and those they oppress, and provoke with their offensive behaviour. And their society was destroyed. And little is left of pharaoes society today, or other idolaters societies, such as communism.

It really shouldn?t be too hard. One really needs to just do what is right. Mad lustcultivators cannot go among monotheist children. You are not really grown-up if you cannot appreciate the death-penality on gays. Or herion-dealers for that sake, or similar things.

Also as I said elsewhere, idolaters fear the beast. They do not have god. And the bigger beast is deathpenality, and the best you can ever give them, to correct their behaviour, and ultimately live a decent life according to the praises of God, or suffer with gay/drugs etc, and be dead.

I have visited the forum many times, and indeed many of the same people post, and they do react to sense as usual. Proud.
And indeed I see the free-minds sect, as it is becoming, has a view on things, that is not quranic. Still claiming alcohol "is not forbidden", and excusing homophilia etc. So free-minds, seem to indeed be like a scholar, a viewpoint, that identifies certain people, and the forum does indeed ban others. No free-minds, and correct minds are not allowed. Gay and drugged minds, perhaps? And closed minds, to Islam.

Peace Be With You.

Emil

A high iq yes.

You forgot to comment on

very angry with what it seemed the entire world

The reason why I was wondering if it is you, Paradox, is because it would make me happy if it was. To be honest with you I thought you were completely nuts, but then I realized you are a person who has been treated unfair, that you are highly intelligent but could not find peace. Everywhere you looked you found signs of decadence and polytheism. Something that is quite easy to find in your society (as well as mine) because of our history.......Anyways I felt very sad when you left f-m in anger. . Not because I have any delusion that I would be able to help you, but I pray that one day you will stop hating the world so much. Maybe there is a very small chance that the people here on f-m could help you to find acceptance and forgivness towards those who do not think like you. I didnt say you have to agree, just accept one of the core values of islam, namely peace and respect to others and their ways, eventhough they completely disagree with you.

Your dislike seems to have expanded from your countrymen and their lewdness to also include sexual orientation. I see the dislike and disgust from you in statements like

the suffering gays, and those they oppress, and provoke with their offensive behaviour

and it blinds you. You have hijacked islam so you can find divine proof that your disgust of today's society is righteous.

If you are not Paradox Uncreated, well sorry for mistaken you for another.

Of course you do not agree with anything I have written, well maybe that you are highly intelligent...............That is ok with me, don't need to agree. I just wish you luck and I pray peace will be with You.

NS

I have to say I agree with your principles Noble, but I do wonder if the death penalty is really the appropriate punishment. I mean, I might support "disappearing" some particularly obnoxious gay activists to "send a message", so to speak (as a state policy of course, I am not in anyway endorsing individual violent acts), but why do you think that they should all be killed?

Bigmo

I have to say I agree with your principles Noble, but I do wonder if the death penalty is really the appropriate punishment. I mean, I might support "disappearing" some particularly obnoxious gay activists to "send a message", so to speak (as a state policy of course, I am not in anyway endorsing individual violent acts), but why do you think that they should all be killed?

To send a messsage? Thats deterence argument. Thats not a Quranic concept but a Sunni one. They believe the punishment can exceed the crime to act as a deterence. The Quran only recognizes proportional justice. An eye for an eye and not an eye for an eye lash.

NS

To send a messsage? Thats deterence argument. Thats not a Quranic concept but a Sunni one. They believe the punishment can exceed the crime to act as a deterence. The Quran only recognizes proportional justice. An eye for an eye and not an eye for an eye lash.

Gonna need a source for that.

Magnus

Gonna need a source for that.

I think the passage 540-50 establishes the principle of proportionality rather clearly, with 545 being translatable thus

And We have decreed for them in it that a life for a life, and an eye for an eye, and a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and wounds to be similar; and whoever remits anything of it, then it will cancel sins for him. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the wicked.

Bigmo

I think the passage 540-50 establishes the principle of proportionality rather clearly, with 545 being translatable thus

Also

O ye who believe, equivalence is the law decreed for ye when dealing with murder - the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female. If one is pardoned by the victim's kin, an appreciative response is in order, and an equitable compensation shall be paid. This is an alleviation from thine Lord and mercy. Anyone who transgresses beyond this incurs a painful retribution.

the sacred month is for the sacred month, and for violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with those who fear Him. 2.194

And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers

Proportional justice where apples for apples, oranges for oranges and grapes for grapes. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth and a soul for a soul. Proportional justice and not deterence justice to send a message or disproportionate justice where apples for oranges, slaves for the free or a tooth for a jaw.

NS

I think the passage 540-50 establishes the principle of proportionality rather clearly, with 545 being translatable thus

Nope.

That was in reference to the children of Israel. Quote it in context.

Also

O ye who believe, equivalence is the law decreed for ye when dealing with murder - the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female. If one is pardoned by the victim's kin, an appreciative response is in order, and an equitable compensation shall be paid. This is an alleviation from thine Lord and mercy. Anyone who transgresses beyond this incurs a painful retribution.

Emphasis on "when dealing with murder."

the sacred month is for the sacred month, and for violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with those who fear Him. 2.194

Proportional justice where apples for apples, oranges for oranges and grapes for grapes. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth and a soul for a soul. Proportional justice and not deterence justice to send a message or disproportionate justice where apples for oranges, slaves for the free or a tooth for a jaw.

Ok then. Let's rape rapists. Anything else would be unjust.

Oh but wait, "retribution" can mean anything. Try again. And oh yeah, the context of that verse is referring to war.

Bigmo

Nope.

That was in reference to the children of Israel. Quote it in context.

Emphasis on "when dealing with murder."

Ok then. Let's rape rapists. Anything else would be unjust.

Oh but wait, "retribution" can mean anything. Try again. And oh yeah, the context of that verse is referring to war.

Yes a soul for a sol but also eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, men for men and the free for the free. I also detect sarcasm in your tone.

The problem here is there is still many Sunni influences that you are holding on too. You sound sometimes desperate.

1682 But if they turn away from you, your only duty is a clear delivery of the Message

479-80 Say ?Whatever good betides you is from God and whatever evil betides you is from your own self and that We have sent you to mankind only as a messenger and all sufficing is God as witness. Whoso obeys the Messenger, he indeed obeys God. And for those who turn away, We have not sent you as a keeper."

1753-54 And tell my servants that they should speak in a most kindly manner. Verily, Satan is always ready to stir up discord between men; for verily; Satan is mans foe.... Hence, we have not sent you with power to determine their Faith

24.54. Say "Obey God, and obey the Messenger, but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message).

8821 22; And so, exhort them your task is only to exhort; you cannot compel them to believe.

426 48 And whoso takes for patrons others besides God, over them does God keep a watch. Mark, you are not a keeper over them. But if they turn aside from you (do not get disheartened), for We have not sent you to be a keeper over them; your task is but to preach

6412 Obey God then and obey the Messenger, but if you turn away (no blame shall attach to our Messenger), for the duty of Our Messenger is just to deliver the message.

28.55-56 And when they hear vain talk, they turn away there from and say "To us our deeds, and to you yours; peace be to you we seek not the ignorant," It is true thou wilt not be able to guide whom thou lovest; but God guides those whom He will and He knows best those who receive guidance

As we can clearly see, many of the verses that talks about obeying the prophet also emphasizes the prophet's limited authority, something that the Islamic sects do not recognize. The ruler to them has the authority to punish people for what they consider sins like drinking alcohol, eating pork, not fasting Ramadan, watching pornos etc.

The Koran meanwhile focuses on crimes against another like stealing, killing, slandering of women falsely and oppression. It gave the believers the right to fight against those who fight them but not to transgress. It also gave people the right to defend themselves against evictions from their lands. There is no talk about punishing people for something that does not concern somebody else's right.

Adultery is the only place where the Koran diverted from this due to the fact that a adultery affects another party. Here the Koran sees adultery as affecting the other partner in a marriage. It?s a betrayal and a breaking of oath. But even then it placed strict standards on that but was lenient when it came to punishing slanders of women. Adultery needs four witnesses but the slander can get punished by flogging just from opening his mouth without four witnesses. It?s clear that the verse made it very difficult to implement on adultery but very easy to implement on the slanderer. Further reading of the verse about the Zani and Zania shows us that the issue came up concerning slandering of one of the female members of the community. But adultery still affects another party as its a breaking of an oath between a man and a woman and is an act of betrayal and causes pain and anguish.

The Koran cannot order the prophet to punish people for sins, that God's job. The Koran gave people the right and freedom to disbelieve let alone sin. Plus how the Koran understands sins is very different than how the sects understand sins.

In the end the sects had no choice but to abrogate many of these verses, usually invoking the "sword verse". They claim that many of these verses that gave the prophet limited authority(over those who chose to disobey him) has been abrogated by verse 9-5 or verse 9-29.

However these verses were about the wars with the pagans, and verse 9-13 and many other verses makes it clear who instigated these battles and why. The Jizya verse (9-29) also was claimed by the sects to be a tax to be paid by non Muslims in an Islamic state for protection. However Jizya never came concerning the Medina community where the prophet and his followers had a community. And only came upon the believers entering of Mecca. Jizya could have easily been compensation for the loss of property and homes that the believers suffered after being forced into exile. The Koran forbade prophets from seeking any form of reward. They can however accept charity on behalf of the believers.

But the Sunnah claimed otherwise. In it the prophet was ordered to fight the people till they acknowledge monotheism and also in it the prophet ordered the execution of those who apostate. That?s why they abrogated many of the verses that limited his authority. Then they simply transferred that authority to the Muslim ruler by default. The Ridda war story about Abu Bakr is a case study of this. In that story Abu Bakr apparently fought people for not paying Zakat. Now the authority was transferred from God to the prophet to one of his companions. This made it very easy to then transfer that authority to the ruler. This is why you see places where Shariah law is implemented filled with such concepts like searching cars for alcohol or flogging people for watching pornos or not wearing proper attire. None of this should concern anyone but it has become a punishable sin. God only punishes those who did not get caught and punished in this world. The sects claimed that once punished the sin falls away and disappears. You will not find such a concept in the Koran. There God punishes in a million ways and does not need humans to punish for him. I think the sects introduced this conc3ept to make people more accepting of this by making them think its better for them since God's punishment is more severe. They also introduced stoning the adulterer by claiming the Zina verse in the Koran is concerning fornification and not adultery. They claimed that the verse about stoning was lost and is not included in the Koran but the ruling remains.

This of course violated not only the freedom aspect of the Koran but also an eye for an eye and a life for a life. In the Koran, any punishment must be reciprocal and proportionate to the crime and it also must be targeted towards the actual perpetrators of the crime and not someone else associated to the criminal as the case with tribal laws that simply targets anyone from that tribe. They broke this by lower the bar for executions. Some Sunni scholars also gave the authority to execute homosexuals and enslave female prisoners and execute male prisoners. Something the Koran forbade. The Koran gave two options for prisoners, either freedom or ransom of some sort. They gave this authority to the ruler. This is all very sad as the taking of someone?s life is no easy matter in the Koran. God should take life and not humans, but if a person takes a life then he lost his right to live, but even then the Koran gave exile from the community as another option for murder especially if the person shows repentance. So an eye for an eye and a tooth for tooth somehow ended up being an eye for an eye lash and a tooth for a jaw.

To be fair the Sunni orthodoxy rarely practiced some of these laws. We know of no time in history where adulterers were stoned to death. Apostasy was rarely practiced, unlike the Christians in Europe that practiced these laws left and right. So the Sunni jurist knew that some of these laws could be controversial. There is a rumour about Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab the founder or rather the revivalist of Salafism (some call it wahhabism) stoned a women to death. This was the only time in Islamic history that we heard such a thing.

Its very unfortunate the current Islamist in Iran and Sudan and the Salafis in generally never understood why these laws were controversial. But in doing so they exposed much aspect of the sects that people were not aware of. The Sufis provided a convenient cover as they shunned legalism. But even the clerics understood that these laws were controversial. Its not easy in Islam to execute outside of murder. But this wise tradition was broken. That?s very unfortunant as now we see the culture of death has spread among Muslims till Islam became synonymous with violence and killing. Once you lower the bar it spirals out of control.

One thing is crystal clear from all this. The Koran's take on human authority and freedom is RADICALLY different than how the sects understand it. Therefore the biggest difference between a Koranic state and a Sunni or Shia state will come in the form of the state's authority over the masses. It is this, more than anything else, that separates the Koran from the Sunnah. That?s why the Abbasids championed the Sunnah over the Mutazilites. The Mutaziltes couldn't find the ink inthe Koran to give them such draconian authority. The sects did that by first bringing the divine authority from God to prophet, then propet to Caliph (companions) and now that authority is in Omar Al Bashir, Khamenei, Mullah Omar and Al Saud. And that?s very sad.

neb87

@Bigmo It's posts like your's that make it crystal clear to me that I need to study more about the history and evolution of Islam. You made a lot of points that I'd never heard before; I didn't know the controversial laws were old but unenforced, I thought it was all more recent and that was why you don't see it much in history. Could you recommend some good places to start?

NS

Yes a soul for a sol but also eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, men for men and the free for the free. I also detect sarcasm in your tone.

The problem here is there is still many Sunni influences that you are holding on too. You sound sometimes desperate.

So what if I hold on to Sunni influences? Don't try and tell me that you're uninfluenced by anything except the Qur'an. You yourself admitted that you study economics, which is a source of authority that certainly isn't formulated by the Qur'an.