Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, andres said:

I believe God is one. When it comes to trinity, I do not believe any Christian really understand the relation between Gods three appearences. 

I also believe in doing good, but some things that the Bible and Quran say I should do to my fellow humans, is in my opinion evil. 

I also believe to avoid doing evil. But some things that the Bible and Quran say is evil, is in my opinion good. 

All this probably because I live in a different culture.

Naturally Muslims understand the Prophet differently. Who is going to decide who is right?

Leaving Islam aside, how do you reconcile that what God determines to be evil you think of as good and vice versa? Examples?

Edited by shiaman14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

Leaving Islam aside, how do you reconcile that what God determines to be evil you think of as good and vice versa? Examples?

For exampke stoning punishments for working during the Sanbath, adultery, homosexuality, apostasy. Allowing more than one wife. Ban on eating pork. 

My conciense tell me this is wrong and that these laws are outdated. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, andres said:

I also believe to avoid doing evil. But some things that the Bible and Quran say is evil, is in my opinion good. 

As far as the Quran is concerned, could you please give a few examples with references?

Edited by baqar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, andres said:

For exampke stoning punishments for working during the Sanbath, adultery, homosexuality, apostasy. Allowing more than one wife. Ban on eating pork. 

My conciense tell me this is wrong and that these laws are outdated. 

 

So the fact that God did not put a statute of limitation on these laws is problematic for you? Does this imply the Bible or God's Laws are wrong today?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a Jewish point of view, no one other than Jews are obligated to the laws detailed in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers or Deuteronomy.  Our covenant with God literally begins with the words,"I am the Lord your God Who brought you out of Egypt".  He might be the Lord of the Universe, but these laws were between Him and the people that He brought out of Egypt.

However, God did make a covenant with all of humanity, originally with Adam and renewed with Noah.  The essential laws of that covenant are:

1.) Do not deny God.

2.) Do not blaspheme God.

3.) Do not murder.

4.) Do not engage in sexual immorality.

5.) Do not steal.

6.) Do not eat from a live animal.

7.) Establish a legal system to ensure a just and orderly society.

Sounds a lot like Acts 15:28-29

It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: you are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.

It seems that James and Peter were aware of these laws.  I would assume that the vast majority of Christians would consider these to be things that they do or strive to do.  But according to a Torah understanding of the world, this is a non-Jew's obligation to God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2017 at 11:24 PM, shiaman14 said:

So the fact that God did not put a statute of limitation on these laws is problematic for you? Does this imply the Bible or God's Laws are wrong today?

The commands of Jesus we find in the Nes Testament Gospels are kind of universal. "Love God, your fellow human, treat others well, speak the truth, forgive etc."  The epistles sometimes give an opinion of how we shall behave. These are highly influenced by the culture the writers lived in. Cultures that are very different from our own. 

The Old Testament and the Quran contain many laws. They also reflect the cultures in which they were composed. God never wrote a book himself. Men wrote about what they believed God meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, andres said:

 The Old Testament and the Quran contain many laws. 

On the contrary, most of the Quran is about God and ethics. There is very little about laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, andres said:

The commands of Jesus we find in the Nes Testament Gospels are kind of universal. "Love God, your fellow human, treat others well, speak the truth, forgive etc."  The epistles sometimes give an opinion of how we shall behave. These are highly influenced by the culture the writers lived in. Cultures that are very different from our own. 

The Old Testament and the Quran contain many laws. They also reflect the cultures in which they were composed. God never wrote a book himself. Men wrote about what they believed God meant.

so Old Testament is neither universal nor necessarily applicable in today's time or possible wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

so Old Testament is neither universal nor necessarily applicable in today's time or possible wrong?

Not wrong. It was probably right when composed. But many laws are no longer relevant or regarded as fair. Same with the Quran. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, andres said:

Not wrong. It was probably right when composed. But many laws are no longer relevant or regarded as fair. Same with the Quran. 

Well now that will open a can of worms.

I don't think people can or should decide what divine laws are abrogated now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

Well now that will open a can of worms.

I don't think people can or should decide what divine laws are abrogated now.

Are amputation of thieves hands (Quran) and stoning to death, for having gathered fuel to heat a cold house during sabbath (Bible),  laws that God has set for all humanity during all times?

Or do they reflect the cultures of the times when these laws were written?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, andres said:

Are amputation of thieve's hands (Quran). 

That is not the law.

It is merely a guideline.

According to Shia scholars, it is only to be applied if a dozen or so conditions are fulfilled- in other words, if there should be absolutely no excuse to steal.

So in effect, it has rarely been applied by either of the two people who have had governing power in the Shia scheme of things - the Prophet and Imam Ali.

of course, we are all aware that Saudi Arabia has applied this rule quite frequently but that, as we are all aware, is not a Shia country.

We Shias are not responsible for the interpretations of other Muslims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, baqar said:

That is not the law.

It is merely a guideline.

According to Shia scholars, it is only to be applied if a dozen or so conditions are fulfilled- in other words, if there should be absolutely no excuse to steal.

So in effect, it has rarely been applied by either of the two people who have had governing power in the Shia scheme of things - the Prophet and Imam Ali.

of course, we are all aware that Saudi Arabia has applied this rule quite frequently but that, as we are all aware, is not a Shia country.

We Shias are not responsible for the interpretations of other Muslims.

Quran 5:38: "As for] the thief, the male and the female, amputate their hands in recompense for what they committed as a [punishment] from Allah." 

You are also a product of your cultural background, and so you seemingly do not thisk this is fair either.  I am sure many Saudis agree with us. Guideline or law, the Quran say this is what should be done to humans if conditiobs are fulfilled. These conditions are also a product of Muhamneds cultural background. The Quran does not value female witnesses as much as male witnesses. This is not fair to me either. It was accepted in the paternal societies back then. In modern educated nations slavery is banned. We do not find such ban in Bible and Quran . Times were different. As a result laws ( or guidelines if you prefer this word) also were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, andres said:

You are also a product of your cultural background

So are you.

And unless you believe that your culture is superior to mine, there was hardly any point in making that statement.

It would have been more polite to say "We are all a product of our individual cultures."

Even that is not entirely true but could be accepted.

13 hours ago, andres said:

I am sure many Saudis agree with us. 

What an adorable couple you would make!

Congratulations!

Bit what do you mean by "US"?

Are you trying to play the US - THEM game?

Let me tell you that many of those whom you think are part of US don't agree with you.

The following quote from Karen Armstrong proves my point.

I am sure you will accept her as part of US.

"We must remember what life had been like for women in the pre-Islamic period when female infanticide was the norm and when women had no rights at all. Like slaves, women were treated as an inferior species, who had no legal existence.

In such a primitive world, what Muhammad achieved for women was extraordinary. The very idea that a woman could be a witness or could inherit anything at all in her own right was astonishingWe must also recall that in Christian Europe, women had to wait until the nineteenth century before they had anything similar: even then, the law remained heavily weighted towards men."

The colours are from me but the text is from the book "Muhammad - A Biography of the Prophet" by Karen Armstrong, Page 191. The book was published by Harper Collins, New York, 1993.

So before you begin your next rant, it might be useful to find out what a lot of those whom you think are part of your US have to say in the matter.

And I have nothing more to say.

Be well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Baqar.

Of course I also am a product of my cultural background. We all are.  I also know Muhammed was a progressive man that improved womens rights in his society. 

You need not speak with large letters, I agree with what you say.

Just wish to add that since the 19th century, great improvements have happened to womens rights. More in the Christian world than in the Muslim. We may disagree on this, but so be it.

Edited by andres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, andres said:

Just wish to add that since the 19th century, great improvements have happened to women's rights. More in the Christian world than in the Muslim. We may disagree on this, but so be it.

Hi Andres

No, I don't disagree at all.

But don't forget that as a result of some of those changes, people all over the world have become more promiscuous and lascivious.

In the 19th century, there were far fewer rapes than there are at the moment.

So the changes are not necessarily all good.

Some perhaps are good but certainly not all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, andres said:

Where have you got this info from?

I cannot tell you exactly where.

But the figures speak for themselves.

There are half a million rapes every year in South Africa alone.

Rise in incidence has been reported by several countries especially India.

You can try googling for more information.

The following book might have some relevant information.

"Rape: A History from 1860 to the Present"

by Joanna Bourke

 

Edited by baqar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, baqar said:

I cannot tell you exactly where.

But the figures speak for themselves.

There are half a million rapes every year in South Africa alone.

Rise in incidence has been reported by several countries especially India.

You can try googling for more information.

The following book might have some relevant information.

"Rape: A History from 1860 to the Present"

by Joanna Bourke

 

There are no reliable statistics from the 18th century. Rape has always existed.  Sweden has a comparamly long statistic history. Still it is not possible to compare today with 50 years ago. More rapes are reposted to the police today but this does not mean there were less before. Victims more often report to the police today. Men with muslim background are overrepresented in Sweden when it comes to reported sexual crimes. Could this indicate that rape is actually more common in Muslim countries? Or are they not used to light dressed women? Or something else. 

 

Edited by andres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For this topic, the book of Galatians is useful.

 

Galatians 5:1

"It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery. (referring to the self imposed slavery that abiding by laws will get you into heaven)"

 

5:2

" Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. " People placing these laws above Christs sacrifice, misunderstand His sacrifice.

 

5:4

" You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. "

5:13-15

" You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh[a]; rather, serve one another humbly in love. 14 For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”[b] 15 If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other. "

 

The law that Jesus brought forth has been translated into "do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh, rather serve one another humbly in love".

 

In other words, abiding by laws will not win your way into heaven. Christ has already died so that you may reach heaven despite those laws. If it is assumed that following specific practices will get you into heaven, it defeats the value in what Christ has done on the cross.

The verses go on further with "do not use your freedom to indulge in the flesh". So you have freedom in Christ, but do not abuse the freedom, rather "serve one another humbly in love". This is the law of Jesus.

And finally, those who are attempting to elevate their position in piety through specific practices, are simultaneously putting down or devaluing the practice and attempted piety of others. And in that, are biting and devouring eachother, and must watch out or they we will be destroyed by eachother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2017 at 8:15 AM, andres said:

The Quran does not value female witnesses as much as male witnesses. This is not fair to me either. It was accepted in the paternal societies back then.

Not true - in some circumstance the testimony of 1 woman is equivalent to the testimony 4 men.

On 8/13/2017 at 11:18 PM, iCambrian said:

For this topic, the book of Galatians is useful.

 

Galatians 5:1

"It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery. (referring to the self imposed slavery that abiding by laws will get you into heaven)"

 

5:2

" Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. " People placing these laws above Christs sacrifice, misunderstand His sacrifice.

 

5:4

" You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. "

5:13-15

" You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh[a]; rather, serve one another humbly in love. 14 For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”[b] 15 If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other. "

 

The law that Jesus brought forth has been translated into "do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh, rather serve one another humbly in love".

 

In other words, abiding by laws will not win your way into heaven. Christ has already died so that you may reach heaven despite those laws. If it is assumed that following specific practices will get you into heaven, it defeats the value in what Christ has done on the cross.

The verses go on further with "do not use your freedom to indulge in the flesh". So you have freedom in Christ, but do not abuse the freedom, rather "serve one another humbly in love". This is the law of Jesus.

And finally, those who are attempting to elevate their position in piety through specific practices, are simultaneously putting down or devaluing the practice and attempted piety of others. And in that, are biting and devouring eachother, and must watch out or they we will be destroyed by eachother.

Peace,

The words in Galatians are not those of Jesus. He specifically said:

Matthew 5:17 - “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Please help reconcile Galatians and Matthew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Please help reconcile Galatians and Matthew.

Jesus said, "A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another as I have loved you. Anyone following this directive meets or exceeds all laws, because none of the laws can be broken while practicing. 

The reason Jesus said “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets..." was because they were always after Jesus for breaking the man made god laws of the Pharisees. The Pharisees knew what He was talking about.

Paul was saying, "Don't be thinking following the law out of obligation will get you into Heaven". This goes back to the story of the rich young ruler, (Matthew 19) that came to Jesus and asked what he must do to be saved. Jesus told him to follow the commandments.  The ruler said he had since a child and wanted to know what he was lacking. Jesus said, "Sell all that you have and give it to the poor"  Not what the ruler wanted to hear so he went away sad. This guy had followed the law, but still knew he was missing something.

Jesus pointed it out, Paul explained it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

Jesus said, "A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another as I have loved you. Anyone following this directive meets or exceeds all laws, because none of the laws can be broken while practicing. 

Where is this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Condolences on the shahadat of Imam Hassan Mujtaba AS. Imam Hasan (a.s.) said: Translation I wonder about those who think about their body’s food, but do not think about their soul’s food. They keep undesirable food away from their belly, but fill up their heart with destructive subjects.1 Brief Description Our people are usually quite careful with their food and do not start eating unless they know what it is. They avoid anything that looks doubtful and some go to great lengths to ensure that the body receives good, clean, healthy diet. Yet, when it comes to the food for the soul, these same individuals will throw caution to the winds. With eyes closed, unaware of the reality, they would have no hesitation in pouring down any mental food into their soul. They harm their souls by accepting without question the speeches of unsuitable friends, misleading press reports and suspicious or poisonous propagation, and this is very surprising. 1. Safinat’ul-Bihar 84, article of taste. Bihar Al-Anwar, vol 1, page 218.  https://www.al-islam.org/pt/node/30305
    • Abu Hurayra [PDF only] https://www.hilmi.eu/islam/books/books/AbuHurayrah2.pdf
    • Salam! Is it possible for a Muslim to receive a burial ground after his/her death either in Najaf or in Wadi al Salam someone not a citizen of Iraq? Many Thanks. John
    • Because the more we Muslims fight amongst ourselves, the weaker our Ummah becomes! Not good!
×