Are these scientific mistakes ???
-
A psychological punishment for fornication is just as effective as a physical one and even better actually. If the society disapproves heavily of the fornication then the culprit will suffer mentally. The method of psychological punishment should be considered, to totally disown the person forever may be taking it too far.
The physical punishment is just ridiculously barbaric and primitive showing of a low level of development. Since mentally afflicting a mind is harder on that person than a physical punishment it is still better and leaves no scars for when the person has repented from their wrongdoing.
The alleged prescribed punishment of lashing via Quran is just showing how out of phase it is with the reality of a supernatural being. Either the text says something else or it is not of a supernatural origin. Not would it prescribe lashing if it was from a supernatural origin (i.e. what you refer to as God/Allah).
Furthermore, fornication causes only mental harm to the spouse(s) of the one(s) involved in the act, so in the Law it was prescribed "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for a life etc" meaning the punishment for the culprit(s) fall/s under mental pain since that is the equivalent punishment to the culprit as the spouse(s) suffer mental pain. The lashing is contradictory to how justice is served via the ancient so-called Mosaic law including the famous "eye for an eye".
And if the spouse(s) can forgive the fornication then this is clearly merciful by them and then their lives can move on as long as the trust can be repaired.
If none of the culprits were not bonded then this is just a case of vain intercourse unless they decide to bond thereafter with each other and thus it is not a sin since declaring to stay as bonded is equal to an oath of bonding and it can be done in private, but before a couple of witnesses is safer FOR THEMSELVES as if the other one lied then they have witnesses which can prove the oath was indeed uttered and the liar can be judged both under the "false testimony" (no lies) and "fornication" (vain sex) commandments of the Law and be inflicted psychological pain upon by showing the community does not approve of wrongdoing.
That above is the jurisdiction of a supernatural being (God/Allah).
Be well
Qarael Amenuel -
The alleged prescribed punishment of lashing via Quran is just showing how out of phase it is with the reality of a supernatural being. Either the text says something else or it is not of a supernatural origin. Not would it prescribe lashing if it was from a supernatural origin (i.e. what you refer to as God/Allah).
At the same time it is not logical to say the verse (242) was added later on because if it in fact was added or straight fabricated it would not be lashing but stoning to death so that there would be no cotradiction between both the Torah and the hadith. I often catch myself thinking that one of the primary reasons I believe there is something entirely different about the Qur'an compared to previous Scriptures is the fact it does not contain stoning to death and a number of other things. At the same time wars in self-defense and physical punishments are still cautious to me. I am not sure why are these things there, either Qur'an was written in another language or there is something very inconstant about the classic Arabic.
-
At the same time it is not logical to say the verse (242) was added later on because if it in fact was added or straight fabricated it would not be lashing but stoning to death so that there would be no cotradiction between both the Torah and the hadith. I often catch myself thinking that one of the primary reasons I believe there is something entirely different about the Qur'an compared to previous Scriptures is the fact it does not contain stoning to death and a number of other things. At the same time wars in self-defense and physical punishments are still cautious to me. I am not sure why are these things there, either Qur'an was written in another language or there is something very inconstant about the classic Arabic.
It is true that traditionalists changed word meanings. I still need to research on how much truth is there in the claim that the concept of "sin" in the interpretation was brought to Quran to cater to Arab Christians who were converting at the time. Mr Ibn Hanbal who later became the apple of Mutwakkil's eyes admitted to not liking the overall interpretation of the Quran back then despite the fact that his contemporaries said Hanbal knew very less about Islam. Both of those people were partners in crime of forcing hadiths on Muslims. I am suspicious of the meanings like prostration, bow with those who bow and establish salat,
I don't see much in lashing since it can only be done if there are witnesses. Plus, public orgy dedicated to certain gods and goddesses has been talked about many times throughout the centuries.
-
I don't see much in lashing since it can only be done if there are witnesses. Plus, public orgy dedicated to certain gods and goddesses has been talked about many times throughout the centuries.
I have a problem with anything 'public'. Who will execute the lashes? The leader? Caliph? Mr. President? Who has elected him/her? Which drives made people accept his/her authority? Hierarchy and the need of the feeling of personal protection? Public punishments are the signs of the community, and I am of opinion that anything spiritual is against any form of society. Person with faith is a citizen of the world, he/she can never be a patriot of any state, since worshiping the flag is the same as worshiping the idol.
It does not mean people will abandon society and governments, there will always be states. But people who are seeking spiritual growth or the faith in God should not execute anything physical against anybody, even fornicators. It is between you and God, nobody has the right to be judge, while the civil judge is a person of authority and authority and hierarchy is clearly instinctive. So there is nothing I believe dedicated to God alone in case public punishments are done. Same as I don't believe there have to be any animal sacrifices in the name of God.
Public orgies dedicated to gods are the same as public punishments dedicated to gods. The state authority and personal faith are incompatible.
Public punishments is a sigh of authority and authority is about herding the sheep. That is why people translate ma malakat aymanakum as girl slaves, because that's what they want - to have girl slaves as their war bounty. That is why majority's views on Heaven and Hell is purely instinctive. Heaven = free and constant pleasure (mostly masculine pleasure btw), Hell = constant pain, not good.
-
A psychological punishment for fornication is just as effective as a physical one and even better actually. If the society disapproves heavily of the fornication then the culprit will suffer mentally. The method of psychological punishment should be considered, to totally disown the person forever may be taking it too far.
The physical punishment is just ridiculously barbaric and primitive showing of a low level of development. Since mentally afflicting a mind is harder on that person than a physical punishment it is still better and leaves no scars for when the person has repented from their wrongdoing.
The alleged prescribed punishment of lashing via Quran is just showing how out of phase it is with the reality of a supernatural being. Either the text says something else or it is not of a supernatural origin. Not would it prescribe lashing if it was from a supernatural origin (i.e. what you refer to as God/Allah).
Furthermore, fornication causes only mental harm to the spouse(s) of the one(s) involved in the act, so in the Law it was prescribed "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for a life etc" meaning the punishment for the culprit(s) fall/s under mental pain since that is the equivalent punishment to the culprit as the spouse(s) suffer mental pain. The lashing is contradictory to how justice is served via the ancient so-called Mosaic law including the famous "eye for an eye".
And if the spouse(s) can forgive the fornication then this is clearly merciful by them and then their lives can move on as long as the trust can be repaired.
If none of the culprits were not bonded then this is just a case of vain intercourse unless they decide to bond thereafter with each other and thus it is not a sin since declaring to stay as bonded is equal to an oath of bonding and it can be done in private, but before a couple of witnesses is safer FOR THEMSELVES as if the other one lied then they have witnesses which can prove the oath was indeed uttered and the liar can be judged both under the "false testimony" (no lies) and "fornication" (vain sex) commandments of the Law and be inflicted psychological pain upon by showing the community does not approve of wrongdoing.
That above is the jurisdiction of a supernatural being (God/Allah).
Be well
Qarael AmenuelI do nto hink you got it. Youhave to read the whole set of ayas till 30 to get the picture of what it is all about. Which is about thing the best of people and about respecting intimacy and not slandering, particularly women. Peopleseem to have got like hypnotized by the first ayas of 24 and that is not it. You have to read on nd realise what the Qur'an s doing. It is in fact withdrawing any power from hearsay and people to harm other people particularly women.
But it seems that as soon as we see the first little thing that is not "civilised" enough we loose all rationality and capacity to think through and get happy with whatever nonsense.
Really, many, many, many times inthsi forum not only I do not see any more entlightment amongs "qur'an only" than amonst sectarians. Some times many "sectarians" are far more reasonable than some of the things that people trade here. Their mental picture of what is really revelation and what is not may be blurred, but they have far more common sense and generosity of spirit.
This is not particularly about you, Man of Faith (save for the lashes) but in general. Sometimes I get the feeling that some prople are here just because this is a more "select" place than "sectarian places" but that they do not have to change any narrowness of mind and spirit.
Salaam
-
I have a problem with anything 'public'. Who will execute the lashes? The leader? Caliph? Mr. President? Who has elected him/her? Which drives made people accept his/her authority? Hierarchy and the need of the feeling of personal protection? Public punishments are the signs of the community, and I am of opinion that anything spiritual is against any form of society. Person with faith is a citizen of the world, he/she can never be a patriot of any state, since worshiping the flag is the same as worshiping the idol.
It does not mean people will abandon society and governments, there will always be states. But people who are seeking spiritual growth or the faith in God should not execute anything physical against anybody, even fornicators. It is between you and God, nobody has the right to be judge, while the civil judge is a person of authority and authority and hierarchy is clearly instinctive. So there is nothing I believe dedicated to God alone in case public punishments are done. Same as I don't believe there have to be any animal sacrifices in the name of God.
How does one punish for something done privately?
Public orgies dedicated to gods are the same as public punishments dedicated to gods.
Exactly! That's the point.
The state authority and personal faith are incompatible.
Not much. The entire faith is not personal.
Public punishments is a sigh of authority and authority is about herding the sheep. That is why people translate ma malakat aymanakum as girl slaves, because that's what they want - to have girl slaves as their war bounty. That is why majority's views on Heaven and Hell is purely instinctive. Heaven = free and constant pleasure (mostly masculine pleasure btw), Hell = constant pain, not good.
I suppose that is why we don't agree with them?
-
I do nto hink you got it. Youhave to read the whole set of ayas till 30 to get the picture of what it is all about. Which is about thing the best of people and about respecting intimacy and not slandering, particularly women. Peopleseem to have got like hypnotized by the first ayas of 24 and that is not it. You have to read on nd realise what the Qur'an s doing. It is in fact withdrawing any power from hearsay and people to harm other people particularly women.
But it seems that as soon as we see the first little thing that is not "civilised" enough we loose all rationality and capacity to think through and get happy with whatever nonsense.
Really, many, many, many times inthsi forum not only I do not see any more entlightment amongs "qur'an only" than amonst sectarians. Some times many "sectarians" are far more reasonable than some of the things that people trade here. Their mental picture of what is really revelation and what is not may be blurred, but they have far more common sense and generosity of spirit.
This is not particularly about you, Man of Faith (save for the lashes) but in general. Sometimes I get the feeling that some prople are here just because this is a more "select" place than "sectarian places" but that they do not have to change any narrowness of mind and spirit.
Salaam
Point is that I do not believe it says anything about lashes, but I was speaking hypothetically based on common understanding among people. I am trying to show points of logic in order to show the inconsistency. I am not trying to change the Islam people adhere to, only giving people another perspective and perchance they shall understand Quran is indeed grossly misinterpreted, not only lightly and thus pursue the truth, with or without my help, I do not care as long as people become more sound mentally.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel -
I do not believe Quran advocates a physical punishment such as lashing though.
-
?Have you understood what I said?
It does not matter whether it is lashing or whatever it may meand the j-l-d thing. It is not something that is presented in order to be done, but that is presented in order to prevent that people slander, gossip in destroy reputations and people, particularly women.
Salaam
-
It does not matter whether it is lashing or whatever it may meand the j-l-d thing. It is not something that is presented in order to be done, but that is presented in order to prevent that people slander, gossip in destroy reputations and people, particularly women.
Salaam
https//media.giphy.com/media/aLdiZJmmx4OVW/giphy.gif
That is exactly how I see it, thank you!
Peace!! -
?Have you understood what I said?
It does not matter whether it is lashing or whatever it may meand the j-l-d thing. It is not something that is presented in order to be done, but that is presented in order to prevent that people slander, gossip in destroy reputations and people, particularly women.
Salaam
Elaborate? How is it not presented as injuction to execute 100 lashes?
-
Elaborate? How is it not presented as injuction to execute 100 lashes?
Can you testify infront of God for your 4 witnesses that they are being truthful?
2408 And the punishment will be averted from her if she bears witness four times by God that he is of the liars.
Peace.https//media.giphy.com/media/l0NhXTZ7et5sf84gw/giphy.gif
-
Can you testify infront of God for your 4 witnesses that they are being truthful?
2408 And the punishment will be averted from her if she bears witness four times by God that he is of the liars.
Peace.Four witness my butt. She will never get that many 'witnesses' in her favour behind closed doors. Not to mention most people can be jealous and won't testify even if they saw. Something is fishy about these verses.
-
Four witness my butt. She will never get that many 'witnesses' in her favour behind closed doors. Not to mention most people can be jealous and won't testify even if they saw. Something is fishy about these verses.
Right on!
Peace.
https//media.giphy.com/media/bKBM7H63PIykM/giphy.gif -
Elaborate? How is it not presented as injuction to execute 100 lashes?
I said answering Man of Faith to read the whole series of ayas till about aya 30.
If somebody, getting that far does nto see what the ayas are about, it well be useless to go on exlaining.
-
I said answering Man of Faith to read the whole series of ayas till about aya 30.
If somebody, getting that far does nto see what the ayas are about, it well be useless to go on exlaining.
I understand but the problem of lashes is still there no matter what. If it is between God and the people it should be enough. If they testify in the name of God and lie, there will be curse upon them, that should be enough, why lashes and witnesses? Again this community type of thing.
-
Oh wow, really? Can we see the data from the experiment you have done to come up with this conclusion?
I think what RT is trying to say is there is nothing in the Quran beyond what was known to man at that time.
If the Quran was a book science then you'd expect the basics like the relative size of the earth to the sun or that the earth would look like a star itself from another planet etc.
The point is Muhammed wasn't given any advanced information about the world, otherwise he'd be able to claim a miracle.
His mission was to convince through the power of argument alone, rather than miraculous knowledge. -
I was thinking on the lashes and 545 came to me. You have the right for an eye for an eye but whoever resists his/her right for retribution and instead forgives in charity for him/her is expiation.
I might be wrong but I think the Qur'an deliberately misguides many people by making them think that it has certain harsh punishments but in reality it is a test for your Being i.e. Spirit (ruh), and if you resist the temptation (and the feeling of revenge is very temptive for most) then you have basically passed the test.
Hm.....
-
I think what RT is trying to say is there is nothing in the Quran beyond what was known to man at that time.
I don't think he meant that. He clearly stated "7th century".
The point is Muhammed wasn't given any advanced information about the world, otherwise he'd be able to claim a miracle.
His mission was to convince through the power of argument alone, rather than miraculous knowledge.The point is that it is weird to talk about something without knowing it properly. Quran is a manual and so is a book called BMW manual.
Now imagine me reading that BMW manual to come up with a conclusion about whether it is good and relevant. But alas, I never tried using that book for my car. It becomes even more embarrassing when I make that comment in front of a bunch of lifelong BMW enthusiasts.
Well, you can punish yourself with depression, it is way worse than lashes yes
I agree P