Secularism: The Devil?s greatest trick
-
peace Fahad,
No, its because you are unable disprove my interpretation at all. Try it, then you'll see it is not just my personal interpretation, it is actually what Quran is saying. Thats what I want to show(the Quran's stance) to those who believe in the Quran.
My knowledge of arabic is crap to say the least, so I can't disprove your interpretation through that method. I can however, under the assumption that the quran is true, prove your interpretation wrong through logic and counter examples. If I can prove my position, and my position is contrary to yours, then either your interpretation or the quran itself is wrong.
But since you take the quran only as proof, I honestly don't know how to prove it because I can only give you my interpretation of the verses.
"there is no compulsion in deen." (I honestly don't get how you are interpreting it)
My interpretation of it is that we cannot be forced into submission. Maybe outwardly we can pretend to be believers, but then we are hypocrites. So really the only way to follow the truth is to truly believe in it.
And here's the problem,
With people, it doesn't matter whether you're a hypocrite or not. It DOES NOT MATTER what you do when you're alone. The only thing that matters to others is how your actions affect them.
But with God, it's an entirely different matter. To god, it matters what you do when you're alone. If you're a hypocrite, god will know it, and every action of yours will be accounted for.
See the difference?
Being a hypocrite is wrong, but can people punish you for it? They won't even be aware of the fact let alone punish you.
Do you understand what I'm saying?
There's the law of man (social) and the law of god (personal). You can't deal with both the same way.
Why isn't there a punishment in the quran for eating pork? Because it falls under the "law of god." It's a personal thing. You are not harming anyone but yourself. God is the only one that can punish you.I think the quran tries to deal with both matters. It deals with personal and social matters.
There's pornorgraphy (zina) for instance, there's a punishment of a hundred lashes...correct? Well, the quran knows that is a social issue, and other people will be harmed because of that action, so society can punish you.
(not that I necessarily agree that porn harms society)The quran knows the difference.
If the quran wanted us to FORCE others to do the right thing, there would be a civil punishment for every sin, including eating pork, disrespecting your parents, drinking alcohol, gambling, and setting up partners with God.
But there isn't.Do you get a hint of what I'm saying now?
The relationship between me and god is between me and god. It's private. It's no one else's business. The only time it becomes other peoples' business is when they are affected by my actions.
I can believe in as many ****ing idols as I want, and you can do nothing about it. P -
Salaam dargento
i am a westerner, have been living half of my life outside the west. And i can tell you for sure that middle eastern societies are just as "screwed up". Even if single parents are a rarer occurence - but there are so many different aspects.
I heard this argument about the decadent west so often on FM - and i think it is not an argument at all. Just a value judgment.
Salaam Elke
Don't be defensive . I was born in the Middle East, raised most of my 'conscious' life in the west. I maintain no affiliation to any country. The only race I belong to is the Human race. I despise bigotry whether it be against whites, blacks, asians... you name it. Look at the stats OPF posted. Yes I agree the middle east is as screwed up as the west. I wasn't talking about the west being more screwed up as the rest of the world as a whole. But you have to look at some other stats. America is #1 in most of the worst diseases in the world, yet claims to be so technologically advanced. I'm not making a judgement at all, just go and look. You haven't seen how many underage teenage mothers there are these days? You think that is good for parent/child? Why do you think the kids in this country are so screwed up?
Let's also be clear that pre-marital does happen in the middle east also. They are hardly innocent.
Now I am not in the favor of 'banning pre-marital sex'. As I like to say 'You dig your own grave, you gotta sleep in it.'
I am in the favor of protecting the society as a whole. If we have mothers who aren't ready, it'll trickle down to the kids.
-
Both sides face an entirely different set of problems, it just so happens that people have gotten used to their own problems, but see fault in the other side. Very simple.
-
Single parents are the fault of pre-marital sex? Are you serious?
Don't walk before you can crawl now... No, single parents aren't at fault for pre-marital sex. I am saying single parents aren't good for children. How you seen how mentally freaked (sorry not a cuss word!) America is?
To me, two people can be committed to each other regardless of whether they have signed a legal document or not.
Agreed.
Irresponsible sex is a personal decision, and you get what you sow. Sure you may be ruining your life, but that's your decision and you have every right to make it.
The poor are not anyone's responsibility. No one has to help them. The government SHOULD NOT step in to help them.
Charity is not a compulsion upon anyone. We are supposed to give out of the goodness of our hearts. Helping people is a good thing, but no one is being forced to do it.If you can't pay your hospital bills, well, that's your personal problem. If someone helps you out, that's great for you, and it was their personal decision to help you out.
No one can be forced to pay your hospital bills. That's just wrong.All these "welfare" states...what the government is doing is stealing.
The important thing here is that every individual has the god given right to do whatever the hell they want with their lives, and no one can stop them unless they are harming others.
Everyone has the right to keep their property and their money. No one can take it away from you, not even the government, even if it is to feed the poor. If you don't want to help anyone, if you want to be an asshole, you have the right to that.Agreed if we were in a system where the government wouldn't 'help out'.
Also define Responsible and Irresponsible sex?
-
Don't walk before you can crawl now... No, single parents aren't at fault for pre-marital sex. I am saying single parents aren't good for children. How you seen how mentally freaked (sorry not a cuss word!) America is?
Agreed.
Agreed if we were in a system where the government wouldn't 'help out'.
Also define Responsible and Irresponsible sex?
Responsible sex would be sex with someone you are committed with, someone you are in a "long term relationship" with. Irresponsible would be like a one night stand...getting drunk and going at it with someone you just met.
-
What are you talking about?
The "Kuffar West" idea, really.
-
Islam is a religion...
Religion? Only beliefs and rituals, you mean? The rest of the laws are not part of 'ad-deen'/'al-islam'?
Ad-deen is not mere rituals, but it is to give ibadat/service to Allah by obeying His absolute authority in ALL matters dealt with in the Quran, not just the rituals. Take 29/17 and 2/172 for example.
...and not a state
Well, 'al-islam' itself is not a state, but God promises(24/55) those who believe and do works of improvement that He will make them successors in the land and establish their deen/al-islam there for them, so they will serve Him and not associate anything in His hukm(Rule/Judgement). You can call it a Quranic state, society or domain whatever. What do you say?
-
Peace fahad
Peace Elke.
That we all bow, willingly or unwillingy, to the system of god is imo pointing to the submission to the laws of nature (3.83).
I dont think so. It is not just the natural laws. Both verses are talking about the same laws, since 'ad-deen'(2/256) and 'deenillah'(3/83) are the same thing. (like al-huda and hudallah are the same thing, 6/71, 3/73). Do you agree?
Which should in no way affect our freedom to belief /or not in God ...
It does not effect the freedom to believe.
...or to "practice" islam or not .
Don't think of it as "practicing a religion", think of it as living by the law of the land(the Quranic domain in, this case) like we all do. The laws aren't many, neither are the punishments. If we think that the laws are too strict, we can leave. There are no punishments for not believing or not performing rituals etc.
-
Fahad The dogmatic beliefs and hatred will result whenever we are taken away from Allah's deen, whether towards sectarianism or secularism. We are either in Allah's deen or we are in Shaitaan's. If we are in Allah's deen, then He receives our ibadah/service. If we are not, then whether you label it Secularism or Sectarianism or whatever, we are in the Shaitaan's deen and he receives our ibadah. There is no middle way.
Zulf The problem is that everyone claims that HIS deen is Allah's deen, they just call it different things. There can be no consensus on this, and has never been. Only a way which let's people of different creeds coexist will minimize the level of hatred and war etc.
And a Quranic system isn't good enough for peaceful co-existence?!
Such a system is nowadays called secular, simply because there can't be consensus on what deen to follow.
Did you know that secularism is also a deen? Shaitaan's deen?
If we stop shoving such things that we can't agree upon down others throats, then we can have a common ground. Beyond this you are free to practice your own deen, the one which YOU are sure is Allah's deen, for yourself.
Say, if I am not happy with the traffic laws, should I be allowed to drive as I please? Shouldn't the law be shoved down my throat?
Of course, we can always promote items from Allah's deen and show others how it would be beneficial to humanity, and adopt it through some democratic way... and in this way have more and more of Allah's deen in our secular system. Items from Allah's deen should afterall be the best, so the challenge is to win peoples hearts by appealing to their common sense, logic and goodness... not by force, fear or threat.
2/120, 6/116, 7/179.
Things are not that black and white!
Everyone is a servant of Allah(19/93). But most are not exclusive to Him, and Shaitaan will claim them all collectively(not individually, like you think) as his servants. Like the partial ibadah/service you are promoting. Serving Allah is no big deal. Everyone can do that. We have to be exclusive to Him. We are either exclusive to Allah or we are claimed by Shaitaan
4/118 God has cursed him(Shaitaan); and he had said "I will assuredly take a definite portion of your servants/ibaad".
38/82 He(Shaitaan) said "By Your majesty, I will assuredly mislead them all(i.e. collectively)."
38/83 "Except for those among Your ibaad/servants who are mukhliseen/exclusive(to You)."
38/84 He(God) said "Therefore the Truth is, and the Truth is all I speak,"
38/84 "that I will fill Hell with you and all those who follow you."Therefore, things are black and white, in this case. What do you say?
Lobster,
I will reply to your post. -
Peace fahad
I dont think so. It is not just the natural laws. Both verses are talking about the same laws, since 'ad-deen'(2/256) and 'deenillah'(3/83) are the same thing. (like al-huda and hudallah are the same thing, 6/71, 3/73). Do you agree?
i checked the wording in arabic before i answered you and yes found that it is deen each time. still my stance on this is that 3.83 is talking about bowing to the will of allah (as expressed by laws of nature because no one escapes these laws) and that there is no compulsion as you say yourself in quote underneath if you don't accept the laws of the ("quaranic" land, you can escape these laws, at least for your lifetime. So there is a difference. But rereading your post i get what you mean and agree in fine everybody is in the hand of god and we are forced to submit to the system 'deen' without any choice - but this is yawn al quiyama - judgement day. As long as we are on this earth, we have a choice for part of the system (laws organising society in quran) but not for natural laws.
Don't think of it as "practicing a religion", think of it as living by the law of the land(the Quranic domain in, this case) like we all do. The laws aren't many, neither are the punishments. If we think that the laws are too strict, we can leave. There are no punishments for not believing or not performing rituals etc.
i agree, but want to add that i don't take all the laws in quaran as divine laws - i'm a little on bigmos line for this and said it many times before. If the finality of the law (what i call the "morals" that count and if the finality can be reached differently nowadays, laws should be adapted.
elke
-
Fahad No, its because you are unable disprove my interpretation at all. Try it, then you'll see it is not just my personal interpretation, it is actually what Quran is saying. Thats what I want to show(the Quran's stance) to those who believe in the Quran.
Lobster My knowledge of arabic is crap to say the least, so I can't disprove your interpretation through that method.
Thats the only method, since it is a discussion about whether it is Quranic, not about whether it is right or wrong. My knowledge of Arabic was also crap a year ago, not that it is very good now, but it is not too difficult to understand the Quran's language. Give it a try, specially if you can read urdu, it'll be very easier for you.
I can however, under the assumption that the quran is true, prove your interpretation wrong through logic and counter examples. If I can prove my position, and my position is contrary to yours, then either your interpretation or the quran itself is wrong.
What logic have you provided so far? You have only told what you believe is right and wrong. And again, we are not here to prove that the Quran is right or not, but to prove whether the laws are Quranic or not. I hope you can see the difference. There is a whole another section for proving the right and wrong.
But since you take the quran only as proof, I honestly don't know how to prove it because I can only give you my interpretation of the verses.
"there is no compulsion in deen." (I honestly don't get how you are interpreting it)This is how I interpret it
Your interpretation is actually that there are no punishments for breaking the Quranic laws. Now how can you say that when you can see that there ARE punishments in the Quran for breaking the law(tale adultery for example). Therefore, can "no compulsion" mean what you think it means? Tell me please.
My interpretation of it is that we cannot be forced into submission.
We CAN be forced into submt(27/31, 3/83), but we cannot be forced to believe.
Maybe outwardly we can pretend to be believers, but then we are hypocrites. So really the only way to follow the truth is to truly believe in it.
Right. (4/65)
And here's the problem,
With people, it doesn't matter whether you're a hypocrite or not. It DOES NOT MATTER what you do when you're alone. The only thing that matters to others is how your actions affect them.
But with God, it's an entirely different matter. To god, it matters what you do when you're alone. If you're a hypocrite, god will know it, and every action of yours will be accounted for.
See the difference?A person is a hypocrite when he pretends to believe while he actually does not believe. But belief is not same as submission. Because when a person "pretends" to submit, he is actually submitting. See the difference between belief/eeman and submission/islam?
Being a hypocrite is wrong, but can people punish you for it? They won't even be aware of the fact let alone punish you.
Do you understand what I'm saying?Right, I understand what you're saying. What you are saying is about belief, not about submission. Now tell me if you understand this
People CAN punish you for not submitting, because they WILL BE AWARE of the fact that you are not submitting when you are caught breaking the law(of zina, for example). Again, do you understand the difference between belief and submission now? Let me know please.
There's the law of man (social) and the law of god (personal). You can't deal with both the same way.
Why isn't there a punishment in the quran for eating pork? Because it falls under the "law of god." It's a personal thing. You are not harming anyone but yourself. God is the only one that can punish you.Where did I say that there is any punishment for eating pork?
I think the quran tries to deal with both matters. It deals with personal and social matters.
There's pornorgraphy (zina) for instance, there's a punishment of a hundred lashes...correct? Well, the quran knows that is a social issue, and other people will be harmed because of that action, so society can punish you...Ok. Wasn't I was saying the same thing?
The quran knows the difference.
If the quran wanted us to FORCE others to do the right thing, there would be a civil punishment for every sin, including eating pork, disrespecting your parents, drinking alcohol, gambling, and setting up partners with God.
But there isn't.Where did I say there is any punishment for the above mentioned sins?!
Do you get a hint of what I'm saying now?
I get the hint of what you are saying, but tell me if you get my hint. I did not say that there is punishment for eating pork, gambling, setting up partners etc. Or at least I am not aware of any punishments.
The relationship between me and god is between me and god. It's private. It's no one else's business. The only time it becomes other peoples' business is when they are affected by my actions.
Faith/eeman is private, yes. No one else's business.
I can believe in as many ****ing idols as I want, and you can do nothing about it.
Yep.
-
We CAN be forced into submt(27/31, 3/83), but we cannot be forced to believe.
No, not at all. The first verse has mutual consent, the second verse is a challenge to people, in the same way that "in which hadeeth after this" is a challenge.
-
Fahad I dont think so. It is not just the natural laws. Both verses are talking about the same laws, since 'ad-deen'(2/256) and 'deenillah'(3/83) are the same thing. (like al-huda and hudallah are the same thing, 6/71, 3/73). Do you agree?
Elke i checked the wording in arabic before i answered you and yes found that it is deen each time. still my stance on this is that 3.83 is talking about bowing to the will of allah (as expressed by laws of nature because no one escapes these laws) and that there is no compulsion as you say yourself in quote underneath if you don't accept the laws of the ("quaranic" land, you can escape these laws, at least for your lifetime.
We can't escape the laws, we only escape the legal punishments, not the natural consequences of breaking these laws. I think we can say that the law for adultery is a natural law(for humans, of course), but the punishment, not the consequences, is not natural.(because the punishment is given by other humans)
-
Fahad We CAN be forced into submt(27/31, 3/83), but we cannot be forced to believe.
OPF No, not at all. The first verse has mutual consent, the second verse is a challenge to people, in the same way that "in which hadeeth after this" is a challenge.
How has the first verse got mutual consent?! Have you read the context of the verse? Does this look like mutual consent to you
(Free-Minds translation)
27/37 "Return to them. For we shall come to them with soldiers the like of which they have never seen, and we will drive them out humiliated, and while they are debased."?
And how is "in which hadeeth after this" a challenge? People do believe in hadees other than the Quran. Does it mean that people have won the challenge?
Similarly, people do look for other than the deenillah. Have they also won the challenge?
-
peace Fahad,
Thats the only method, since it is a discussion about whether it is Quranic, not about whether it is right or wrong. My knowledge of Arabic was also crap a year ago, not that it is very good now, but it is not too difficult to understand the Quran's language. Give it a try, specially if you can read urdu, it'll be very easier for you.
I disagree that it's the only method. Obviously if your interpretation doesn't make sense logically, or has at least one counter example going against it, there is something wrong with it (or the Quran itself).
I think knowing quranic arabic would certainly help, but I don't know if learning arabic is worth it. I mean, there are a lot of arabic "experts" on this forum, but they still disagree with each other.
And to me, what the quran REALLY says isn't that important. As long as I am getting verifiable guidance from it.
Oh, and my urdu reading is poor too. '(What logic have you provided so far? You have only told what you believe is right and wrong. And again, we are not here to prove that the Quran is right or not, but to prove whether the laws are Quranic or not. I hope you can see the difference. There is a whole another section for proving the right and wrong.
Yes, I haven't provided any real proof, but I've used sound logic (based on the premise that people's right to freedom cannot be violated) to come to certain conclusions, and I have yet to see any argument against what I said, except "the Quran says you're wrong."
So in my last post, I decided to use the quran to show you that it does agree with me.Your interpretation is actually that there are no punishments for breaking the Quranic laws. Now how can you say that when you can see that there ARE punishments in the Quran for breaking the law(tale adultery for example). Therefore, can "no compulsion" mean what you think it means? Tell me please
I'm not saying there are no punishments. Of course there are.
For example, I am morbidly obese, and you (my doctor), tell me that I should stay away from ice cream or I will die.
Now, although you have warned, reminded, guided me(fulfilling the quran's role in this case), you cannot FORCE me to do anything. I can go back home and eat as much ice cream that I want. The punishment obviously will be death in this case. The reason you can't force me is because God has given me free will, just like god has given me life, no one has the right to take that away.
If you physically prevent me from eating ice cream, you are taking away my free will. I am no longer accountable for my actions. Well, I'm not going to get into why controlling others is wrong, because everyone I have met believes it is wrong...isn't that the reason we shouldn't have slaves?
So anyway, God has given you free will, and God will let you choose. God has given you the freedom to choose right or wrong.2731 Exalt not yourselves against Me, but come unto Me in willing surrender!
383 Do they seek, perchance, a faith other than in God, although it is unto Him that whatever is in the heavens and on earth surrenders itself, willingly or unwillingly, since unto Him all must return?About those two verses, I think God wants a willing surrender from us, because a forced surrender is meaningless. That's why we have no compulsion. The unwilling surrender happens when we die...we return to god.
But either way, these verses talk about surrender to God...not to people. WE cannot force anyone to do what we believe god wants.
A person is a hypocrite when he pretends to believe while he actually does not believe. But belief is not same as submission. Because when a person "pretends" to submit, he is actually submitting. See the difference between belief/eeman and submission/islam?
So in a perfect world, everyone would have computer chips implanted in their brains from birth which would make them follow the Quran without any questions.
Don't you see what's wrong with that?
If you think controlling people is okay, then I don't think we can debate about this because we have vastly different moral standards.People CAN punish you for not submitting, because they WILL BE AWARE of the fact that you are not submitting when you are caught breaking the law(of zina, for example). Again, do you understand the difference between belief and submission now? Let me know please.
I do understand what you mean by belief and submission...although I don't agree to those definitions.
I have no other comments on this.Where did I say that there is any punishment for eating pork?
Of course you didn't. Did I say you did?
Do you ever wonder WHY there isn't a punishment for eating pork? or for drinking alcohol, or for gambling?
If those things are wrong, why isn't there a punishment?My reasoning for that is that the Quran, like me, understands that following God and respecting the welfare and rights of other people are different issues. Believe in God is a personal matter, no one but God punishes you.
If you harm others, the others punish you.So yeah, I think it comes down to this question Do you think people have a right to freedom of choice?
If you think "no" then we can't have a debate because we don't have a premise.1091 SAY "O you who deny the truth!
1092 "I do not worship that which you worship,
1093 and neither do you worship that which I worship!
1094 "And I will not worship that which you have worshipped,
1095 and neither will you worship that which I worship.
1096 Unto you, your moral law, and unto me, mine !" -
I don't understand how and why the Secularism has anything to do with Pre-Marital Sex.
I don't understand why this topic has became a place to do a discussion on Pre-Marital Sex?
Secularism address a SECTARIANISM problems.
People gets stoned, crucified or burn to death because they defy an authorative priest and challenge their dogma.
Good example of those people are Jesus and his brother Jacob and also Ibrahim / Abraham.
Jesus was crucified yet survived, Jacob was stoned to death and Abraham was burnt yet survived.
Those people lives in a SECTARIANISM world.
Therefore I say SECTARIANISM is The Devil's greatest trick.In a secular world, no one should be punished due to their infidelity to the popular dogma / beliefs.
And "the country" by itself does not professed to the specific sect or dogmatic beliefs.As far as I know; no one gets stoned due to their infidelity to the priest / church in USA.
Although many people gets burned in the past due to their colour of skin, but it's not being done by the government, yet by certain sects with racist beliefs.In Short
Secularism is a cultural movement to bring down sectarianism and sectarian authority.And it is 100% aligned with the Quran. read 5727 about the human innovation of Rahbaniyah systems.
Salam