Understanding the story of Lot and homosexuality
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
You clearly have no knowledge of the Arabic, 424 is talking about Women, from the start of the verse, all the way to the end.. So the answer is Yes--a homosexual relationship is beyond this.
Thank you for clarifying. Homosexual relationships are beyond what is mentioned, and beyond what is mentioned is permitted. What do you know, the Arabic IS clear and easy to understand.
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.
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
Peace hawk99,
That is right, my brother. The relationship is intended to follow God's design and the way God is formulating Himself indicates that it is supposed to be followed in that manner.
Peace Man of Faith,
I have great respect for your intellectual acumen, and your synopsis of the Quran, but in matters such
as personal relationships, "The Book"/narration/ inspiration/gift into the mind/heart is clearly devoid of homosexual
relationships. The ayats of the Quran are "legs to stand on"/support a position, therefore I say the people of Lot
who engaged in sexual perversions were non-repentant 25/56. Is this mindset of arrogance and non-conformance a
characteristic of some gay folk? Is God in his wisdom telling us in Quran that there are some homosexual people who
are determined to follow their lusts no matter the consequences? Is it pointless to address their decision
to indulge in such behavior? However, if faith and pleasing God is more important than risking God's condemnation
would it best to abstain from such behavior? 16/97Lot said to his people, "How could you commit such an abomination, publicly, while you see?
"You practice sex with the men, lustfully, instead of the women. Indeed, you are ignorant people."
The only response from his people was their saying, "Banish Lot's family from your town;
they are people who wish to be pure."Consequently, we saved him and his family, except his wife; we counted her among the doomed.
We showered them with a certain shower. It was a miserable shower upon people who had been warned.
Why Didn?t God Forbid Gay Marriage? (422-424)
2013 Bilal Wrote
My answer to why God did not forbid same sex marriage is that when it comes to homosexuals and their
homosexuality (and perhaps only when it comes to their homosexuality), those who are openly gay are
unified and determined (1179) in their offensive (780), anti-establishment (781), lustful, passionate,
hot-tempered (117, arrogant (1179) short sighted, selfish (26166) confused, immature,
self-destructive (2755), unapologetic, unconscionable (2754), rebellious (117, threatening,
aggressive, (1570) wildly senseless, distracted (1572) corrupted, unethical, and Godless (2929).
And discriminating against them will not only cause us to loose our moral authority, but it will morph
us into hypocritical bigots by betraying our beliefs in freedom, justice, and equality (2256, 4135)
but it will also, as we have seen, backfire by bringing homosexuals attention and sympathy from
those who are not homosexual but who do not share our belief that homosexuality is wrong. And
fighting homosexuals will not only fail to solve the problem of homosexuality but it will continue
to exacerbate it (1179, 2174, 26166, 2754, 2929).God bless
peace
-
Peace.
While everyone is entitled to their opinions, Selective or partial application of certain verses has been a disastrous practice to confuse the teachings and the commands for us and invent teachings or guidelines that have never been taught by God..
Partial or selective application of the scripture has been misguiding many recipients and has been used as a mean to justify certain opinion! In this forum and in many other forums I am seeing this practice?
We need to heed examples from the past
It was a consequence of their violating the covenant that we condemned them, and we caused their hearts to become hardened. Consequently, they took the words out of context, and disregarded some of the commandments given to them. You will continue to witness betrayal from them, excepting a few of them. You shall pardon them, and disregard them. God loves those who are benevolent.- The failure to defend the infallible word of God is nothing but a failure to validate the Truth and support God. We witness this failure by those who are weak in faith and character. They resort to silence, waver and tolerate nonsense about the word of God in times when they are supposed to stand for the truth only to gain social privileges and portray themselves as gracious and kind believers!
When we claim to speak for GOD and Qoran, we must be sure of our claims.
GOD bless .
Peace. -
Peace hawk,
That is right and I think you slightly misunderstood what I wrote as I did not mean anything other than what you said.
God bless you
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
Thank you for clarifying. Homosexual relationships are beyond what is mentioned, and beyond what is mentioned is permitted. What do you know, the Arabic IS clear and easy to understand.
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.
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
You clearly misunderstood my response. I was meaning that Homosexual intimacy is Beyond the standard of God of marriage.
424 is Talking about women, and "what is beyond this" IS DIRECTED AT WOMEN, NOT MEN
You can marry what is beyond that OF WOMEN, and the "you shall give them their dowries" is Plural and FEMININE = directed at women, NOT men!
You have no hope for finding support of same-sex marriage from the Quran, because I have tried to look for it, but I never found it, and in fact found that the only marriage is between men and women, not men and men, not men and animals, not men and children. -
Peace hawk,
That is right and I think you slightly misunderstood what I wrote as I did not mean anything other than what you said.
God bless you
Peace Man of Faith,
Yes I misunderstood you, but alas my comments were general, and not directed to you but to the thread.
God bless
Thank you for clarifying. Homosexual relationships are beyond what is mentioned, and beyond what is mentioned is permitted. What do you know, the Arabic IS clear and easy to understand.
Peace Abdul-Hadi,
As you know context is very important when it comes to understanding the Quran, as I mentioned earlier,
the surah you quoted is titled "The Women" This is the context, It is not titled homosexuals. The ayat 4/24
if read with preceding and succeeding verses becomes abundantly clear unless the reader decides for
personal reasons to alter their meaning.God bless
peace
-
Peace Abdul-Hadi,
As you know context is very important when it comes to understanding the Quran, as I mentioned earlier,
the surah you quoted is titled "The Women" This is the context, It is not titled homosexuals. The ayat 4/24
if read with preceding and succeeding verses becomes abundantly clear unless the reader decides for
personal reasons to alter their meaning.God bless
peace
The problem that I have with using titles to define the content is that this is not done with all of the titles. Does "The Cow" give special meaning to the 2nd surah--or "The Bee" (which is mentioned exactly once in surah 16)? hmm There is much in surah 4 that does not pertain to women exclusively, look at 416 and 429 for instance. A title is NOT a context, context is better provided by the surrounding ayahs.
I find the immediate context to be of marriage and relationships, not women. Bear in mind that many same sex relationships are between women. Going along with the understanding that the context of surah 4 is women should also give the understanding that same sex relationships between women are clearly allowed.
Either same sex relationships are "what is beyond this," or they are not. It seems clear that they are "what is beyond this," especially if they aren't addressed.
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
The problem that I have with using titles to define the content is that this is not done with all of the titles. Does "The Cow" give special meaning to the 2nd surah--or "The Bee" (which is mentioned exactly once in surah 16)? hmm There is much in surah 4 that does not pertain to women exclusively, look at 416 and 429 for instance. A title is NOT a context, context is better provided by the surrounding ayahs.
I find the immediate context to be of marriage and relationships, not women. Bear in mind that many same sex relationships are between women. Going along with the understanding that the context of surah 4 is women should also give the understanding that same sex relationships between women are clearly allowed.
Either same sex relationships are "what is beyond this," or they are not. It seems clear that they are "what is beyond this," especially if they aren't addressed.
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
You clearly don't understand that Arabic has a separate Feminine tense. You rely on English translations which strips the preciseness of the Arabic. 424, "what is beyond that" is directed at women, the wording is feminine.
FYI In 416 HOMOSEXUAL activity between two men is addressed, and is to be punished. The wording is Masculine DUAL ( 2 Men, Together, having sex)..... Need I say more?
You will never find support for Same sex marriage from the Quran, Trust me I know because I looked and it is clear as day and night that God created Men for women.
-
Peace,
It is dangerous to say that something should be punished by religious law. One has to research carefully. That homosexuality was made incompatible by God is obvious, but we must be careful advocating a punishment in the name of God, or we may be no better than the "hadithers" that only conjectured and, for example, created the stoning punishment and many other ones.
Just because you extract a meaning from the context based on faulty dictionaries does not warrant that it is the true interpretation. The matter with ketab and d -r - b is a reason to be wary of how words are understood in dictionaries. One may know grammar well, but it does not matter if words have been changed in meaning so that even dictionaries misrepresent them. Then it does not help even if you are an expert. We have to exert caution and apply logic and reason and also compare a root word's all applications within the discourse.
God bless you
-
FYI In 416 HOMOSEXUAL activity between two men is addressed, and is to be punished. The wording is Masculine DUAL ( 2 Men, Together, having sex)..... Need I say more?
Not really. It is dual generic or masculine, it might be talking about two males or it might be talking about a male and a female. And there is no hint whatsoever that it is talking about homosexual sex. Just as there is no hint whatsoever that in the previous aya 4.15 it is talking about homosexual female sex. And why should in 4.15 be using the plural and in the next aya de dual to speak about both sexes? And say very different things?
No, there is no foundation to understand it as homosexual sex. Rather 4.15 is referring to public soliciting by prostitutes, and the next aya 4.16 is referring to the prostitute and the client. And that is related to the last part of aya 4.34 where it is talking about the nushuz of women and of the injuonction to the community of investigating about them (advice them, leave them in their places of sleeping and solve their problem).
Clearly in 4.15 four witnesses are required to determine that in fact the women are doing what the are said to be doing, and once determined tha community os commanded to take them off the street and put them in proper houses till they have another way to provide for themselves and thir families or till death. But they are not to leave in in the street to fend for themselves. And the prostitute and the client are to be shown the wrongness of their doings and helpe them to repent and stop it.
No word about homosexuality neither in 4.15 nor in 4.16. If anything is said it is just conjecture.
Prostitution is a very common thing in almost all societies. It would be surprising if the Qur'an did not say a word about it, when it is public and wellknown. Well those two ayas seem to speak about it.
Salaam
-
The problem that I have with using titles to define the content is that this is not done with all of the titles. Does "The Cow" give special meaning to the 2nd surah--or "The Bee" (which is mentioned exactly once in surah 16)? hmm
Peace Abdul-Hadi,
The titles have a wisdom for the reader 2/67-2/74, 16/68-16/69.
Please read the ayats pertaining to the titles to obtain the wisdom therein.There is much in surah 4 that does not pertain to women exclusively, look at 416 and 429 for instance. A title is NOT a context, context is better provided by the surrounding ayahs.
True, but surah 4 is an exception and for you to miss the context of the surrounding ayats of 4/24 leaves you
with an interpolation created by you without foundation!I find the immediate context to be of marriage and relationships, not women. Bear in mind that many same sex relationships are between women. Going along with the understanding that the context of surah 4 is women should also give the understanding that same sex relationships between women are clearly allowed.
Please provide evidence! Can a man receive a dowry from another man?
Either same sex relationships are "what is beyond this," or they are not. It seems clear that they are "what is beyond this," especially if they aren't addressed.
They are not. Using your exclusionary argument what is beyond this could be animals, statues, the ground etc.,
no, there is no "if two men decide to marry....................... or if women want to marry each other................"
these things that you propose are not found anywhere.The context closes thusly
4/25 And whoever among you has not within his power ampleness of means to marry free believing women, then (he may marry) of those whom your right hands possess from among your believing maidens; and Allah knows best your faith you are (sprung) the one from the other; so marry them with the permission of their masters, and give them their dowries justly, they being chaste, not fornicating, nor receiving paramours; and when they are taken in marriage, then if they are guilty of indecency, they shall suffer half the punishment which is (inflicted) upon free women. This is for him among you who fears falling into evil; and that you abstain is better for you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
God bless
peace
-
Not really. It is dual generic or masculine, it might be talking about two males or it might be talking about a male and a female. And there is no hint whatsoever that it is talking about homosexual sex. Just as there is no hint whatsoever that in the previous aya 4.15 it is talking about homosexual female sex. And why should in 4.15 be using the plural and in the next aya de dual to speak about both sexes? And say very different things?
No, there is no foundation to understand it as homosexual sex. Rather 4.15 is referring to public soliciting by prostitutes, and the next aya 4.16 is referring to the prostitute and the client. And that is related to the last part of aya 4.34 where it is talking about the nushuz of women and of the injuonction to the community of investigating about them (advice them, leave them in their places of sleeping and solve their problem).
Clearly in 4.15 four witnesses are required to determine that in fact the women are doing what the are said to be doing, and once determined tha community os commanded to take them off the street and put them in proper houses till they have another way to provide for themselves and thir families or till death. But they are not to leave in in the street to fend for themselves. And the prostitute and the client are to be shown the wrongness of their doings and helpe them to repent and stop it.
No word about homosexuality neither in 4.15 nor in 4.16. If anything is said it is just conjecture.
Prostitution is a very common thing in almost all societies. It would be surprising if the Qur'an did not say a word about it, when it is public and wellknown. Well those two ayas seem to speak about it.
Salaam
416 is about homosexual sex because
- It is a different punishment than Adultery (no lashes)
- the wording of "punish/admonish them" is dual, so dual masculine figures, committing lewdness, and both dual masculine figures get punished, and IF THEY REPENT, then we are to LEAVE THEM ALONE.... Notice how the punishment should be continued UNTIL they stop what they're doing (i.e "and IF the repent"..... this is clearly about homosexual acts because it is different than regular punishment for Zina/adultery
-
Not at all, what is being done is fahishaand that is what the Qur'an says that they are doing. It does say it. Nowhere it is said that anybody is doing anything with somebody of the same sex. Zina is one thing, fahisha is something else. May be homosexual acts can be fahisha, but by no means fahisha is synonim of homosexual acts. And here is no punishment. It is said that people should be admonised or signalled the uglyness of their doings but nowhere is a punishment alloted. If they repent you stop pointing out what they are doing that is ugly. That is all, there is no judicial punishment for it. just as there is no judicial punishment in 4.15.
The dual has the same form whether it is a male and a female or whether it is two males. You cannot affirm from that that it is talking about two males. It might be or it might not be. If the Qur'an was talking about homosexual acts and was meaning it has the means to make it unequivocal.
Salaam
-
Not at all, what is being done is fahishaand that is what the Qur'an says that they are doing. It does say it. Nowhere it is said that anybody is doing anything with somebody of the same sex. Zina is one thing, fahisha is something else. May be homosexual acts can be fahisha, but by no means fahisha is synonim of homosexual acts. And here is no punishment. It is said that people should be admonised or signalled the uglyness of their doings but nowhere is a punishment alloted. If they repent you stop pointing out what they are doing that is ugly. That is all, there is no judicial punishment for it. just as there is no judicial punishment in 4.15.
The dual has the same form whether it is a male and a female or whether it is two males. You cannot affirm from that that it is talking about two males. It might be or it might not be. If the Qur'an was talking about homosexual acts and was meaning it has the means to make it unequivocal.
Salaam
-
I stated that the punishment is DIFFERENT than Zina, but there is still a punishment for it, and a peculiar punishment because it is not the regular punishment of "zina", so here we have a different role (meaning this is NOT a heterosexual sexual misconduct !, this would be a homosexual sexual misconduct)
-
416 is clearly MASCULINE and Dual, thus 2 males, check for yourself
"Alazaan" (The two of you) is a masculine dual relative pronoun
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=16#(4161)
-
-
Masculine or mixed, it is a male and a female it is that same word, not a different word.
And there is no punishment.
Salaam
-
The Punishment is Admonishing (fa2zuhoma), since this is different than regular adultery/fornication (heterosexual), therefor it is a homosexual misconduct, and the punishment is admonishment for the individual, which you have admitted when you stated, "It is said that people should be admonised or signalled the uglyness of their doings ", therefore this is a different "punishment" than for heterosexual misconduct, it is lighter, but the bottom line is, The Quran does not support nor advocate for homosexual activities
-
The words are still 416 is clearly Masculine and Dual, thus 2 males,
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=16#(4161)
-
-
advise them or point out to them is not a punishment, it is the same kind of thig as when believers are told to enjoin other believers to do right an shun bad. It is no punishment. How much pointing out to them, seven times a day? four hundred? In front of people? alone? Advising and pointing things out to somebody is not punishing anybody. It is no ppenalty that can stretch from the moon to one milimiter.
So, please, spell which verbal from would you use to speak about two, one of them a male and one of them a female, using, of course, the dual?
Are you inventig grammar anew?
Salaam
-
advise them or point out to them is not a punishment, it is the same kind of thig as when believers are told to enjoin other believers to do right an shun bad. It is no punishment. How much pointing out to them, seven times a day? four hundred? In front of people? alone? Advising and pointing things out to somebody is not punishing anybody. It is no ppenalty that can stretch from the moon to one milimiter.
So, please, spell which verbal from would you use to speak about two, one of them a male and one of them a female, using, of course, the dual?
Are you inventig grammar anew?
Salaam
The word here is "fa2zuhuma", which has the same root word for when God talks about MENSTRUATION (2222) as "Ezza" = something painful/Harm. The word "fa2zuhoma" would translate to Admonish/chastise them, look at any translation, you think I'm making this up? Look at parallel 50 translations ans see for yourselfhttp//www.islamawakened.com/quran/4/16/default.htm
God is very clear. The word is NOT advise them (3ezohuma), or to point things out to them (qowla baleegha)... The word is "Fa2zuhuma' = Admonish/chastise them, which is a form of a light punishment, as well as clearly telling them what they're doing is wrong.
Note This only applies to BELIEVERS (minkom) who commit this , unbelievers are not under this law.
-
Sorry, my mistake, I read wrong your transcription into latin letters. And somehow I got misled into not recalling the original Arabic word which now I indeed recall and recall that I have already discussed in severla occasions, and although it is stronger that the advising thing, I still consider and have considered it not as a punishment but as public rebuking, since what they do is public, in fact the best translations is precisely the one used some times in the aya of the 2.222, annoyance, that is annoy, them both.
Still it is a couple that coming from 4.15, indeed, can be very plainly what I pointed out before, the prostitute and her prospective client. That is, in 4.15 we have femeinine plural, those who ya'atina el fahisha, and next one of those who ya'atina el fahisha with the one she has angled to be her client.
It still seems a disuasory argument to detract them both from doing that kind of thing, but no punishment. Much too imprecise and of course no hint at it being an homosexual couple.
Salaam
-
You clearly don't understand that Arabic has a separate Feminine tense. You rely on English translations which strips the preciseness of the Arabic. 424, "what is beyond that" is directed at women, the wording is feminine.
FYI In 416 HOMOSEXUAL activity between two men is addressed, and is to be punished. The wording is Masculine DUAL ( 2 Men, Together, having sex)..... Need I say more?
You will never find support for Same sex marriage from the Quran, Trust me I know because I looked and it is clear as day and night that God created Men for women.
That is Quranically incorrect since unlike adultery, homosexuality does not give rise to an aggrieved party. Stealing, killing, slandering, adultery, wrong fully evicted from your home lands and manslaughter are when the Quran gave authority to hold people liable. Its always when another party is wronged. Homosexuality does not fall into that so the Quran could not give anyone the authority to hold homosexuals liable unless there is a committment by one party over the other by oath and that oath is then violated.