Gay and Muslim?
-
Salam
Too much wishful thinking, and I don't how your post is contributing or answering the issue of this thread (refer here and here). You are not referring to the Qur'an and make your personal opinions and wishful thinking from the start. Now, you are calling people "rebel" (refer here), "curse them to hell" (refer here and here), make hate comments (sectarian), and make so many "blank accusations" (refer here) which I don't bother to reply, and simply because they are referring to the Qur'an and have different perspectives. In conclusion, you are the best of all and will be entered into Paradise, and without any needs to refer the Qur'an. It is always other peoples' problems and be in hell (refer here). Please send my regard to Allah, I'll be waiting in the Hell Fire. In fact, I'm not afraid of the Hell Fire!! ;D
Peace
-
Salaam brother,
Why are you not afraid of the Hellfire with your behavior? Lies about me over and over again.
-
Why are you not afraid of the Hellfire with your behavior? Lies about me over and over again.
Salam
So you edit your comments, and it is not lying. I quote every words I said. Proven!
Why should those who believe in the Qur'an afraid of the Hell Fire?
Are you a disbeliever?
Peace.
-
Because it does not matter what you believe if you are not a decent person which you have entirely missed from Qur'an.
-
Salam
Indeed, those who have said, "Our Lord is Allah ,"
and then remained on a right course
there will be no fear concerning them
nor will they grieve
(4613), refer also to (7213)and as I said, you are arguing from a Christian point of views .. adopting Christian views as Islamic views.
A religion, sectarianism and a bigot.
So do you think Khidr will be in the Hell Fire?
Okay if I make it simple and break it into four rules, Islam for you is only the "Afaalullah".. and you set aside the "Asmaulllah", "Sifatullah" and "Dzatullah". Just like what the Christians are doing, Jesus is Love and nothing else matter. So as Buddhism, life is peace and harmony, nothing else matter ... or the Hinduism, life is sacrifice, nothing else matter. That's pretty simple, and there is nothing to reason, weight and balance for a deen, or dealings with various behaviours of human beings and other living creatures (cf. Khalifah). In fact, Allah could just tell us on a single piece of paper, do good! Done! Good Job!
However, does both Mr. Perfect and Mr. Good Heart, or loves have negative side effects?
Does perfection or love "invites fear"?
Insecure?
Depression?
Frustration, abuse, alcoholic or suicide, maybe? !
You are Mr. Good Heart and divorcing, your wife left you... right?
What do you feel now, after being Mr. Good Heart?
Do you able to "READ" (understand) her as Mr. Good Heart?
How many people in this world with good heart and full of love but live miserably?
Being oppressed by the those in power?
Now, how does all that relates with the following ayat?
Unquestionably, the allies of Allah
there will be no fear concerning them
nor will they grieve
(1062)How could it be possible for any human beings to be fear of imperfection or being unloved, and at the same time have no "fear" or "grievance"?
How does all that is the solution by the One True Creator?
You must be kidding.
The Qur'an is not that that simple or like what you think, right?
In fact, I believe you don't understand (read) what you are talking.
You are just rambling, and without facts from the Qur'an (no purpose). )
Right, you don't read and only argues.
Peace.
-
Rather a Christian than an asshole.
-
Rather a Christian than an asshole.
Salam
Thanks for your praise. laugh
Proven! Revealing you're true self, just like any sectarian Sunni or Shia.
You must be the lowliest of beings. Hitting really low and behavior like a true sucker and saying you believe in God. And saying behavior will not count while it is one of the main criteria according to Qur'an. Christian point of view?? It is one of the most important perspectives of Islam.
Now I know I said asshole to you but foul language is allowed when you are subject to gross injustice, should you know who interprets the book so literally.
Where is your patience?
You know well what you really are.
Always knew it , right from the start.
I've said it.
Peace
-
Ok I must stop. U made me lose my temper for sure... I am terribly sorry. .. moderators... my biggest mistake here so far..
Good night
-
Rather a Christian than an asshole.
Salam
Proven! again... laugh
Too much wishful thinking, and I don't how your post is contributing or answering the issue of this thread (refer here and here). You are not referring to the Qur'an and make your personal opinions and wishful thinking from the start. Now, you are calling people "rebel" (refer here), "curse them to hell" (refer here and here), make hate comments (sectarian), and make so many "blank accusations" (refer here) which I don't bother to reply, and simply because they are referring to the Qur'an and have different perspectives. In conclusion, you are the best of all and will be entered into Paradise, and without any needs to refer the Qur'an. It is always other peoples' problems and be in hell (refer here). Please send my regard to Allah, I'll be waiting in the Hell Fire. In fact, I'm not afraid of the Hell Fire!! ;D
Peace
-
ALL human beings have private parts (including homosexual)
Therefore, Allah has permitted "marriage" and has forbidden everything else.
Therefore, "same-sex-marriage" is prohibited since marriage is between man/woman
and there is no such things as using "private parts" to anyone other than
"wives" or "spouses".Unfortunately your reds words didn't backed by any ayats in the Quran, even there is one, this just your misintepretation.
Verses about "guard private part" is 235-6
23.5 And who (ن keep covered their private parts.
23.6 Except around their mates (م, or those who are maintained by their oaths, they are free from blame.The blue word is allazi mean which, who, whom, whose and this is masculine.
The red word is azwaj or zawaj, means mate (mate can be husband or wife) and interestingly the red word is also masculine!!This means this verse is neutral in gender and translation you used is a distortion one.
And verse 7029-31 is a repetation of 235-6.Punishment for homosexual committing the offence of sexual intercourse
otherwise, I believe they must be punished with the same punishment in (241-2), ie. based on the "NATURE OF OFFENCE" - "Sexual Intercourse".
Hence to judge if homosexual is an adultery or not, we must take proper investigation first.
Peace
-
Unfortunately your reds words didn't backed by any ayats in the Quran, even there is one, this just your misintepretation.
Salam
The question is simple... (from here)
MAJOR QUESTION/ISSUE
Whether "homosexuals" must guard their "private parts" EXCEPT to "wives" (women/marriage)?
Answer, choose one
Homosexuals "must guard" their private parts except to "wives" (ie. marriage)
Homosexuals "can use" their private parts to "anyone" (ie. same-sex marriage, etc.)
- Please, no rambling about Lut etc. I'm not discussing about "Lut's nation", but I'm discussing about the rules relating to "private parts". Therefore, please give your authority and clear verses that homosexual can use their "private parts" to anyone, other than "wives" or "spouses".
and I believe, you also ignored all the translation in that post, including the Indonesian translation, despite both of us are just "forumers". State your translation, and we can also start from there logically.
Peace
-
Hence to judge if homosexual is an adultery or not, we must take proper investigation first.
Salam
That is not the issue..
Interesting, you don't know the difference between the "Procedural Law" and "Substantive Law", and treat the "Procedural Law" as if it is the "Substantive Law" relating to the offence itself, and yet, still be able to say...
Peace
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
Salam
How is that could be considered as answering the following question? confused
Peace
There are multiple questions in that link...and only one question in the previous post. You'll have to be clearer if you want questions reanswered...reasking the question so that it can be reanswered would be better than posting a link.
As for the question in the previous post, I didn't make the claim that the two words are the same. The words are not the same. I even stated this in the previous post when I stated
"It is apparent that the words are different...look at the roots though. Also, consider the other evidences, such as different words used for wife and wives."
However, rather than get bogged down in such minutiae...there are some long outstanding questions that you haven't answered. How terrible it must be to accuse others of not answering questions when they haven't answered dozens of questions themselves. Why, doing such could openly expose a person as being a hypocrite!
I'll repost the questions here for your convenience! I'll even post my own understanding for comparison. Btw, ack is shorthand for acknowledged.
Acknowledge that AQ is not ridiculous.
ack
Acknowledge that physical evidence is not ridiculous.
ack
Refute that ALLAH created people differently, as is stated in AQ 3022.
can't refute it
Refute that ALLAH gave us signs in nature, as is stated in AQ 226 and 2164.
can't refute it
Refute that ALLAH created homosexual animals, as are found in nature.
can't refute it, except for animals that don't reproduce sexually at all
Refute that AQ 2929 lists reasons aside from male homosexuality that the people of Lot might have been destroyed.
can't refute it
Refute that the women among the people of Lot were innocent of male-male sex.
can't refute it
Refute that women and children among the people of Lot were destroyed alongside the men among the people of Lot.
Maybe. I wasn't a witness. There is an argument that they were saved with the family of Lot (peace upon all Prophets).
Refute that there is no compulsion in the Deen, as is stated in AQ 2256.
can't refute
Refute that homosexuality is depicted in cave paintings that physically exist that have been dated to be around 12,000 years old.
can't refute
Refute that homosexuality existed at least 5,000 years ago among humans in Mesopotamia, as is found among physical existing evidence.
can't refute
Refute that the people of Lot were destroyed around 1953 BCE.
can't refute
Refute that circa 3000 BCE is before 1953 BCE.
can't refute
Refute that over a thousand years span the time between the recorded homosexual acts in Mesopotamia and the time that the people of Lot were destroyed.
can't refute
Refute that AQ 780 refers to lewdness "such as none of the worlds had done before."
can't refute
Acknowledge that no person alive was present among the people of Lot.
ack
Refute that AQ 1736 states not to uphold what one has no knowledge of.
can't refute
Acknowledge that physical evidence can comprise knowledge.
ack
Acknowledge that knowledge is better than conjecture.
ack
424 And the independent from the women, except those maintained by your oaths; the book of GOD over you; and permitted for you is what is beyond this, if you are seeking with your money to be independent, not for illicit sex. As for those whom you have already had joy with, then you shall give them their dowries as an obligation. There is no sin upon you for what you agree on after the obligation. GOD is Knowledgeable, Wise.
So, is a homosexual relationship beyond this, or not? Yes or no, please.
Yes, a homosexual relationship is beyond this.
Homosexuality and homosexual actions long predate the people of Lot. Could it be, perhaps, that approaching people lustfully (men or women) is transgression?
Yes, approaching people lustfully is a transgression.
In all seriousness, if the lewdness referred to in 415 is homosexuality or even homosexual acts, is this something that spreads?
No, homosexuality doesn't spread. You can't "catch the ghey".
415 And those of your women who commit lewdness , you shall bring four witnesses over them from among you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death terminates their lives, or GOD makes for them a way out.
Even if the words did mean what you think (try substituting your definition in all places where the word occurs, lol), no punishment is applied without four witnesses! Do you dispute about the witnesses?
I can't
Homosexuality is not something that can spread--for that matter, neither is fornication. Do you dispute this?
Neither can spread; no dispute.
Homosexuality is not something that can be improved/bettered/cured. Do you dispute this?
Not by any known method; no dispute.
So then...where is this "homosexuality" that you are referring to coming from--a preconceived notion?
Can't answer this question for you!
Start bringing in other scriptures to supplement/complement/supplant the Deen, and there are contradictions. Do you stone an adulterer or lash them? Is shellfish an abomination?
Lash them, per the Qur'an. Shellfish is not an abomination.
Is the Qur'an enough for a believer or is it not?
For the Deen, yes, it is enough.
(your question) Whether "homosexuals" must guard their "private parts" EXCEPT to "wives" (women/marriage)?
So then, does a woman have to guard her private parts except to her wife?
No! All people have to guard their private parts, except to their partner.
"Except from their wives" is literal and applies to men only, hmm?
No! It is a mistranslated verse that properly translated states that all people have to be chaste except to their partner.
Is it not clear that the verses refer to pairs/mates/groups (which includes spouses)?
It is clear to me!
@muslims You stated that when I place words for comparison that they "ignores its context" , then apply 548-49 out of context? What is the word that best describes a person that accuses others...and undertakes the same action that they accuse others of?
Yes, and the word is "hypocrite".
What are the words for wife and wives in AQ?
There are multiple words. It is puzzling why one would believe that "azwjihim" means wives and wives only when so many other words are used to describe wives.
What do you mean by "general" verses? Do you discount any verses and if so, which and why?
There are no such things as general verses, only verses. I discount none of them.
What do you call a person who engages in hypocrisy?
a hypocrite
Were you attempting a pun (straight path) in a serious conversation?
If so, it was not funny.
Is pretending insult when you weren't even singled out just a way of muddying the water?
This is an example of muddying the water, but whether it was done deliberately or not is unclear (no pun intended).
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
Salam
The question is simple...
and I believe, you also ignored all the translation in that post.
Peace
I already answer yours, but itseems you're ignore it.That my post is also determine the shape of your question.
I already told you if 235-6 is not about marriage, but guard private parts from mate (mate can be same-sex gender).Yes marriage in Quran is about husband and wive, but God never explicitly condemn same-sex marriage.
Interesting, you don't know the difference between the "Procedural Law" and "Substantive Law", and treat the "Procedural Law" as if it is the "Substantive Law" relating to the offence itself, and yet, still be able to say...
This has nothing to do with this topic.
Peace
-
Salaam,
I am terribly sorry for my behavior in this thread dear brothers and sisters. I should not have let myself be provoked into this meaningless quarrel and I showed a bad example of a Muslim and not enough patience. May God make me do better next time.
My last post off-topic here, I promise.
God bless you
-
Peace all,
It is very understandable that when topics of significance are discussed, it touches our cores when they are contested, so, naturally, tempers splay.
But when they do splay, it is beneficial in this respect they serve as reminders that we are in fact descending from debate into insults.
Insults, needless to say, are not productive in the objective pursuit of truth.
I myself have had topics vigorously contested that I hold close to my heart, though, I choose not to let loose my temper, but instead, rebut with a solid and cohesive argument to my greatest ability.
This, for me, is revenge enough.
Not to mention the fact that the use of curses towards other forum members violates the rules of this forum. And it is such a bore to see people throttling each other's necks every time I log into free-minds.
I pray, reason!
-
I already answer yours, but itseems you're ignore it.That my post is also determine the shape of your question.
I already told you if 235-6 is not about marriage, but guard private parts from mate (mate can be same-sex gender).Yes marriage in Quran is about husband and wive, but God never explicitly condemn same-sex marriage.
Salam
(from here)
No, I'm not ignoring your answer and yet, I mentioned how a "forumer" is better qualified and could reject all major translations in this world as being incorrect, in that particular verse.
Further, you are not answering my question, but diverting it to other issues.
Now, do you realize your conclusion that "mates" can be of the same sex (or different sex) means all the rules in "the Qur'an is now self-contradicting"?
All the rules relating to sexual prohibitions in the Qur'an is meaningless?
These rules? (refer here)
Including the rules that say homosexual is a transgression? (ie. the Qur'an is now self contradicting)
In fact, we don't need rules relating to marriages.
Is this your logic?
A self-contradicting Qur'an?
This has nothing to do with this topic.
It has, because you are confused between what is the "rules relating to procedure", and what is the "rules relating to the offence". The difference between "procedural laws" and "substantive laws".
Peace
-
Salam
No, I'm not ignoring you and yet, I mentioned how a "forumer" is better qualified and could reject all major translations in this world as being incorrect, in that particular verse.
Further, you are not answering my question, but diverting it to other issues.
Now, do you realize your conclusion that "mates" can be of the same sex (or different sex) means all the rules in "the Qur'an is now self-contradicting"?
All the rules relating to sexual prohibition in the Qur'an is meaningless?
Is this your logic?
Peace
So according to you, the majority always true??(3110, 6116)
Most of translations yu used is based on Saudi biassed fatwa corridor.I recommend you use free-minds translation.Now, do you realize your conclusion that "mates" can be of the same sex (or different sex) means all the rules in "the Qur'an is now self-contradicting"?
Even Quran only give fatwa for heterosexual marriage but Quran never God never condemn same-sex relation explicitly,then how yu judge if homosexs is haram.
It's like Quran never give fatwa about "masturbation", so we cannot condemn masturb so easily.