Muslim Cleric Calls For Beheading of Dutch Politician

[Ja'far at-Tahir]

I wonder what Ja'far thinks? He sounds a bit gay so my guess is, being Muslim, he's a homophobe hiding deep in a closet right now

1. How does one sound homosexual?
2. How do I sound homosexual?

What do I think? It's a sin, that is clear however I do not support any discrimination or perscution or anything of that nature towards homosexuals, they are human and are free to do what they wish if it harms none the same as heterosexuals. They will be judged by Allah (saw) not me.

 

[GeoffP]

what's your take then?

That your supposition is supposition. If not, illustrate why not.

 

[Michael]

Just ask imam online it's fast and easy anybody can do it

Homosexuality? How do we prove that homosexuality is unnatural and why it is haram?

Homosexuality is Haraam simply because Allah declares it to be Haraam. An innate inclination towards homosexuality does not render it natural and ultimately acceptable. Their research is purely research and theory.

This person is making the exact same logical fallacy as SAM and Ja'far: Appeal to Authority.
This is the exact same illogical stance Muslims take when they say The Qur'an is "Perfect".
This is the exact same illogical stance Muslims take when they say Mohammad was the "Last" Prophet.
Which is to say none.

Imagine IF the Qur'an did unequivocally say homosexuality is a sin. Then, I believe SAM would instead be saying something like: An innate inclination towards homosexuality does not render it natural and ultimately acceptable. She'd think she "freely" came to this conclusion. That it "made sense" to her.

IF the advice from the Qur'an made good sense, then there's be ZERO need to pretend the advice came from a God - as it would be intuitively sensible. Because the Qur'an is mostly nonsensical the only reason people take it seriously is by pretending it came from God. Any one with two pennies to rub together (a little common sense) can plainly see what the authors of the Qur'an are doing when they say God will physically harm you for not believing and give you gifts (after you're dead of course) for doing what the authors instruct you to do. It's so utterly obvious that the authors of the Qur'an were more interested in controlling people's behavior over giving deep insightful advice. Sadly, the legacy of this liters the Middle East and South Asia. If people were taught to think for themselves, and to do with logically, I believe we'd see a move away from following these Bronze Age superstitions. That's just my opinion.

 

[scifes]

Oh? Did he rise from the dead to do so? Because ALL the Hadiths were collected between 200 to 800 years after he died.

i think i DID say "later in his life":bugeye:
besides, the sahaba wrote the hadith when the prophet was alive, in the beginning he instructed for nothing to be written down off him other than the quran, then he said it was ok...i don't see what's so hard to understand.

You mean you need an intercessory to explain the Quran to you?

you claim you don't?
you claim you have the knowledge to trust your own understanding of the quran?

Moi, I prefer to read for myself.

but is that enough?
is that right?

As for Ibn Tamiyya, the father of modern Salafism, you may be interested to know that he too was an ijtehadi Muslim who wrote against the ulema

Ali Eteraz has written a great commentary on the roots of Islamic reform and since you appear to be an advocate for Ibn Tamiyya you may be interested in reading it

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=74542

[/QUOTE]
i'm no fan of ibnu taimia, though i heard a lot of him and respect him..i merely found his book which addressed the islamic law regarding insulting the prophet.

 

[S.A.M.]

i think i DID say "later in his life":bugeye:
besides, the sahaba wrote the hadith when the prophet was alive, in the beginning he instructed for nothing to be written down off him other than the quran, then he said it was ok...i don't see what's so hard to understand.

Sorry your knowledge is flawed. Until the last Sahiba died, it was not permitted to collect any Hadith. They were the ones who ensured that Mohammeds edict was followed. It was only 100 years after Mohammed's death that it once again became alright to collect these hadiths and it was only 200 years after his death that collections started appearing. That is why there is no first person hadith rendered in any of the books. They are all third person commentaries.

you claim you don't?
you claim you have the knowledge to trust your own understanding of the quran?

I do, which is why I do not consider any hadith which contradicts the essence of the Quran as more valid than the Quran

but is that enough?
is that right?

You tell me - is the Quran enough for you to be a Muslim?

i'm no fan of ibnu taimia, though i heard a lot of him and respect him..i merely found his book which addressed the islamic law regarding insulting the prophet.

How strange then that you should consider as valid someone who rejected all traditions of Islam and was not accepted by any of the alim. Even today, Salafis are considered a fringe group with no ability to move with the times. They are in fact what Mohammed fought against all his life - the dogmatic who refused to use their brains and adapt to changes in the world.

 

[Michael]

1. How does one sound homosexual?
2. How do I sound homosexual?

What do I think? It's a sin, that is clear however I do not support any discrimination or perscution or anything of that nature towards homosexuals, they are human and are free to do what they wish if it harms none the same as heterosexuals. They will be judged by Allah (saw) not me.

I understand what you are saying, and it's good you take a live and let live, but I feel you think homosexuality is sinful?

Do you think the Qur'an teaches homosexual acts are a sin?

 

[Michael]

What does "Islam" mean?

What does it mean to be Muslim?

 

[scifes]

Sorry your knowledge is flawed. Until the last Sahiba died, it was not permitted to collect any Hadith. They were the ones who ensured that Mohammeds edict was followed. It was only 100 years after Mohammed's death that it once again became alright to collect these hadiths and it was only 200 years after his death that collections started appearing. That is why there is no first person hadith rendered in any of the books. They are all third person commentaries.

and if i bring you a sahabi who has written a hadith and the prophet conceded?

I do, which is why I do not consider any hadith which contradicts the essence of the Quran as more valid than the Quran

you up for a test then? to prove you know what there is to know about the quran?

You tell me - is the Quran enough for you to be a Muslim?

be a muslim, yes it's enough..even for a non-arabic speaker.
deduct the islamic law from it? explain it? heck no.

tafseer or quran explanation is of four levels;
1-one which is understood by common sense and logic, straight forward.
2-one which only arabs know and recognise from their language.
3-one which only those who have read deeply and between the lines in the quran, scholars and clerics who know it more than a blacksmith knows his anvil[you claim to be one of those]
4-that which only god knows the meaning of, this is the only absolute meaning of the quran, the rest is supplied, but as a probable meaning.

How strange then that you should consider as valid someone who rejected all traditions of Islam and was not accepted by any of the alim.

who are all the "alims" who rejected him?
and now you say he rejected the islamic tradition..

Even today, Salafis are considered a fringe group with no ability to move with the times.

..and here you say he's stuck with it.

and remember, somethings are not meant to move with time, the islamic teachings were revealed perfect, to say that they need to change to match the modern era means they were not revealed perfect.

when requesting that we move forward, first, to where? each will make his own new modern path with is more suited, and we'll end up with many islams instead of the original one.
second, we move out from what? from the prophet's teachings? from god's words? to match modern societies?

science is a process that moves forward, so are most applied fields of knowledge, but not religion, mohammad was the last messenger, there will be no "moving on" from that.

They are in fact what Mohammed fought against all his life - the dogmatic who refused to use their brains and adapt to changes in the world.

well that's funny, wasn't it he who said "i've left with you that which if you stick to you'll never go astray, god's book and my sunnah."
and now you're saying we should change with the times?

 

[scifes]

That your supposition is supposition. If not, illustrate why not.

well ok..many people i know memorize the whole quran from the first page till the last, some even memorize he pages and verses and their position in a page..yet they understand none of what they recite, because they don't understand arabic

but if sam thinks she can say what's islamic and what's not because she reads the quran, then others who read it more thaan she did should know it more, and so their opinions are more "correct" than hers.

 

[S.A.M.]

and if i bring you a sahabi who has written a hadith and the prophet conceded?

Go ahead, I would be very interested to test the isnad of such a hadith

be a muslim, yes it's enough..even for a non-arabic speaker.

You can follow the Quran without understanding it? How very strange.

who are all the "alims" who rejected him?
and now you say he rejected the islamic tradition..

.....and here you say he's stuck with it.

and remember, somethings are not meant to move with time, the islamic teachings were revealed perfect, to say that they need to change to match the modern era means they were not revealed perfect.

I can see why the Salafi tradition attracts you. To you there is no difference between a man who initiated reform by rejecting all tradition and those who followed him by making him a tradition.

 

[Ja'far at-Tahir]

I understand what you are saying, and it's good you take a live and let live, but I feel you think homosexuality is sinful?

Really? What gave you that idea? Was it when I said homosexuality is a sin and thus haram and sinful to engage in?

Do you think the Qur'an teaches homosexual acts are a sin?

Yes, in al-Qur'an it mentions the sexual practices of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah and refers to them as the "people of Lut."

What does "Islam" mean?

The literal word 'Islam' or are you talking about the religion itself and what it means to whomever? In particular me and SAM.

What does it mean to be Muslim?

Same as above, what exactly are you trying to ask?

 

[iceaura]

that hadith has been abrogated by the prophet himself.
”
Oh? Did he rise from the dead to do so? Because ALL the Hadiths were collected between 200 to 800 years after he died

None of the Quran was collected until some time - the exact interval disputed - after Muhammed's death.

The origin of the book remains a matter of research, far from completed - or even, in some respects, begun.

Meanwhile, if Islam and the Muslim religion has deviated from whatever is set down in the Quran, that is far more of a concern to the faithful than outsiders. The religion exists as it is, not in a hypothetical or ideal form, and is not going to be going away any time soon.

 

[Michael]

Really? What gave you that idea? Was it when I said homosexuality is a sin and thus haram and sinful to engage in?

Yes, I know you said that, but it also seemed that you were implying that's between that person and her or his maker.

The literal word 'Islam' or are you talking about the religion itself and what it means to whomever? In particular me and SAM.

Same as above, what exactly are you trying to ask?

It's just that so many people use the words "Islam" and "Muslim" to mean different things I wondered what they mean to the people here today.


For example, there was a Persian "Muslim" who lived in Turkey (if I remember correctly) - a mathematician I think. He not only referred to himself as Muslim, but said Islam was a civilized and meaningful way of life. Now I've already used some terms there and you probably painted a picture of what this person was saying. Did you guess he was atheist? (not "an" atheist, but "atheist", just like you, for all but one God left

Anyway, Muslim for him wasn't someone who believed in God. A Muslim was someone who lived "Islamically". Islam, was a set of cultural practices. I can't remember, but I think he thought people were born "Persian" (as in race).

So, obviously, these terms can mean different things to different people.

 

[Michael]

I can see why the Salafi tradition attracts you. To you there is no difference between a man who initiated reform by rejecting all tradition and those who followed him by making him a tradition.

And actually, in line with what you are saying, also pretended he was talking to a "God".

Interesting, it seems for Scifes that SAM can't intellectually understand the Qur'an because she doesn't speak Arabic as her native tongue. Yet, Scifes has somehow only learned what he was told to learn the same old tripe:
- Arabic is God language
- The Qur'an is Perfect.
- There is only One God.
- Mohammad was the "Last" prophet.
yadda yadda yadda.....

None of these things say anything at all about "thinking". I mean, SAM at least is actually mulling a few things over and coming to potentially new conclusions. Scifes is just being programmed what to think. Soon an Arabic speaking One God who only made One "Perfect" Book (in "Arabic" of course and then stopped having conversations with humans 1400 years ago) will "make sense". That's very interesting to me. We see the same thing happen with Scientolgists. Soon "Xenu" and "Thatans" come to make sense. Which is non-sensible. There's nothing to think about - it's told to you and you accept it.
There's One Alien.
Done, check!
She made a Perfect Book.
Done, check!
You have Thatans.
Done, check!
There is One God.
Done, check!
The Qur'an is Perfect.
Done, check!


I still think Scientologists believe in Xenu because they want the mothership to pick them up after they die. I just don't think many would believe if there was no reward in an afterlife.

Likewise, I wonder how many Muslims would think the Qur'an "made sense" IF Allah didn't reward them with an afterlife? I mean, if there was no rewards, what would people find so illuminating in the Qur'an. Not too much I'd venture to say. Without any promise of an afterlife, suddenly all the stories in the Qur'an would seem rather silly and boring. I would think.

 

[GeoffP]

Interesting comments. I guess I deviate from the fold. I don't think I'll be saved, since I'm a poor believer, but I do believe in Salvation. Perhaps that's merely an admission of operant foolishness.

 

[Sock puppet path]

and if i bring you a sahabi who has written a hadith and the prophet conceded?


you up for a test then? to prove you know what there is to know about the quran?



be a muslim, yes it's enough..even for a non-arabic speaker.
deduct the islamic law from it? explain it? heck no.

tafseer or quran explanation is of four levels;
1-one which is understood by common sense and logic, straight forward.
2-one which only arabs know and recognise from their language.
3-one which only those who have read deeply and between the lines in the quran, scholars and clerics who know it more than a blacksmith knows his anvil[you claim to be one of those]
4-that which only god knows the meaning of, this is the only absolute meaning of the quran, the rest is supplied, but as a probable meaning.


who are all the "alims" who rejected him?
and now you say he rejected the islamic tradition..

..and here you say he's stuck with it.

and remember, somethings are not meant to move with time, the islamic teachings were revealed perfect, to say that they need to change to match the modern era means they were not revealed perfect.

when requesting that we move forward, first, to where? each will make his own new modern path with is more suited, and we'll end up with many islams instead of the original one.
second, we move out from what? from the prophet's teachings? from god's words? to match modern societies?

science is a process that moves forward, so are most applied fields of knowledge, but not religion, mohammad was the last messenger, there will be no "moving on" from that.

well that's funny, wasn't it he who said "i've left with you that which if you stick to you'll never go astray, god's book and my sunnah."
and now you're saying we should change with the times?

This is frikkin hilarious the quran was written by god who knows/sees all it was revealed perfect and is uncorrupted. Yet it is full of verses which correct ealier mistakes, requires an in depth knowledge of arabic and a scholar to understand, and he even threw in some shit that nobody but himself could understand

 

[scifes]

AWESOME!!:xctd:
....
at loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong laaaaaaaast...found the whole bunch translated, tracking stuff in sahih bukhari and muslim is no easy thing, ESPECIALLY in english...so,

Go ahead, I would be very interested to test the isnad of such a hadith

The hadeeth of Abu Shaah was narrated by al-Bukhaari from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him), who said: 'When Allaah granted His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) victory over Makkah, he stood before the people and praised and glorified Allaah, then he said: "Allaah protected Makkah from the elephant and has given authority to His Messenger and the believers over it, so fighting was forbidden for anyone before me, and was made permissible for me for part of a day, and it will not be permissible for anyone after me. Its game should not be chased, its thorny bushes should not be uprooted, and picking up its fallen things is not allowed except for one who makes public announcement for it, and he whose relative is murdered has the option either to accept a compensation for it or to retaliate." Al-'Abbas said, "Except Al-Idhkhir (a kind of plant), for we use it in our graves and houses." The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, "Except Al-Idhkhir." Abu Shaah, a Yemeni, stood up and said, "O Messenger of Allaah! Get it written for me." The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, "Write it for Abu Shaah." (al-Luqatah, 2254)

Ibn Hajar said: What may be understood from the story of Abu Shaah ("Write it for Abu Shaah") is that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) gave permission for hadeeth to be written down from him.

somescholar by the name of al-munajid replied to the confusion some get from the hadith you mentioned, and gives a very comprehensive answer..unfortunately, the webpage includes lots of stuff other professors and historians said at the bottom, but the sheikh's reply is most relevant. here;
http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/r...t_write_down_anything_from_me_except_qur_an__

*siiiiigh..now to get unglued from screen and close the three dozen tabs open, will reply to rest later:sleep:
and i sure hope this post does the trick:bugeye: