Prophet Jesus Crucifiction In Bible

[Mohsin]

:sl:

I know from our islamic viewpoint Prophet Jesus wasn't crucified, he was raised up etc, and one of his companions was given his likeness etc.
But my question is who is the person in the Bible that speaks to the disciples after the alleged crucifiction.In the Bile they say it's Jesus. What is the islamic viewpoint and persepective on this person, and how this story could have arisen
I've always heard how nowhere in the Bible does it teach trinity, or Jesus AS himself say he's son of god etc., and when i saw that there was a talk by Zakir Naik on Jesus AS alleged crucifiction, i thought again, like the other issues it'd probs prove it never happened. Instead it proves that he wasn't crucified, but rather crucificted, ie they didn't quite kill him he didn't die and came back to talk to them. I didn't quite understand what the point of proving this was, as Dr Naik was almost, if you like, teaching that Jesus AS spoke to the disciples after the alleged crucifiction which goes against Quran doesn't it? Or did he mean something else from this?
Basically the question is what is the islamic viewpoint on the events taking place after the alleged crucifiction, do we believe its just a fabrictaed story? As muslims obviously we believe this, but to a christian he would say there were all these witnesses that saw him after the crucifiction, were all of them lieing?

:w:

[*Hana*]

Salam Alaikum Brother:

Christians believe Jesus died on the cross, was buried and was then ressurected after 3 days. Dr. Naik is explaining that there is no way He died on the cross, therefore, no resurrection.

In order for Jesus to have been resurrected, He would have had to be in the spiritual form which means like the angels. He wouldn't require food, drink, sleep, etc. However, Jesus was very much alive when He spoke to the disciples because He tells them, "Look at my hands, my feet. It's me, Jesus." He tells them he's not a spirit as a spirit doesn't have skin and bones as he does. He then asks for food as there is no need for spirits to eat. Remember too, the bible says you can only die ONCE, and then there is resurrection.

So, what Dr. Naik is saying is that Jesus, contrary to what Christians believe, was NOT resurrected at all. He was very much alive AFTER the supposed crucifixion. They say their entire salvation is based on this resurrection...but as Dr. Naik as explained, the resurrection didn't happen. Jesus was very much alive, was not spiratual. No resurrection....No salvation.

Hope that explains it. :)

Wa'alaikum salam
Hana

[mansio]

Any proofs of Mr Naik's assertions ?

[Mohsin]

Sister Hana, he's trying to refute the christians thought using the bible, i'm saying we as muslims don't believe that he got crucified, or that he got crucificted, which is what Dr Naik is trying to prove. We don't believe he survived the attempted crucifiction because as muslims we believe he was raised up alive, so i don't know why Dr Naik is trying to prove something we don't believe, regardless of wether it proves the Christian way of thought to be wrong
Anyway my question was what is the muslim perspective on the person that spoke to the disciples after the alleged crucifiction, because as muslims we obviously don't believe it was Jesus AS, as he was raised up, so who is this person? is this story made up? It just seems weird that so many people together made up such a story

Any proofs of Mr Naik's assertions ?

Zakir Naik proved his assertions that he got crucificted, rather than crucified in a debate. He proved it using the Bible. The talk isn't actually available on the net, but there is one by Ahmed Deedat, who was Dr Naiks teacher. You can listen to that here, its called "Crucifixion Or Crucifiction"
http://is.aswatalislam.net/DisplayFi...e=Ahmed_Deedat

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[QURBAN]

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful!

Praise be to God,
the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;

Peace to those who follow the Guidence!

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Holy Quran Surah Nisa (4:157)

[Mohsin]

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful!

Praise be to God,
the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;

Peace to those who follow the Guidence!

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Holy Quran Surah Nisa (4:157)

jazakallah khair for post bro, ut unfotunately still don't answer my question

[Benny]

So, what Dr. Naik is saying is that Jesus, contrary to what Christians believe, was NOT resurrected at all. He was very much alive AFTER the supposed crucifixion. They say their entire salvation is based on this resurrection...but as Dr. Naik as explained, the resurrection didn't happen. Jesus was very much alive, was not spiratual. No resurrection....No salvation.

Hope that explains it. :)

Wa'alaikum salam
Hana

I think I'm seeing the difference between Islam and Christianity. If Dr. Naik said the same thing about Islam, gunmen would be showing up at his door. I think it's rather preculiar that Muslims can denounce Christianity, yet, Christians aren't allowed to denounce Islam. Why is that I wonder? I'm sorry, I don't mean to be offensive, I'm just curious by nature, and find it odd.

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

I think I'm seeing the difference between Islam and Christianity. If Dr. Naik said the same thing about Islam, gunmen would be showing up at his door.

A rather stereotyped opinion, I must say.

I think it's rather preculiar that Muslims can denounce Christianity, yet, Christians aren't allowed to denounce Islam. Why is that I wonder? I'm sorry, I don't mean to be offensive, I'm just curious by nature, and find it odd.

Since when are Christians "not allowed" to denounce Islam? If they see a problem, they are most welcome to bring it forth and clarify it with Muslims. Likewise, Muslims discuss what seem like discrepancies in Christianity to see whether there is any explanation for them.

Peace.

[Benny]

Greetings,

A rather stereotyped opinion, I must say.

Probably, That's why I'm here to dispell all the steriotypes in my mind that I've seen and have been exposed to.

Since when are Christians "not allowed" to denounce Islam? If they see a problem, they are most welcome to bring it forth and clarify it with Muslims. Likewise, Muslims discuss what seem like discrepancies in Christianity to see whether there is any explanation for them.

Peace.

There was that rushdie dude that wrote that book. they were hunting him down. There's the gunmen that protest the cartoon publishers (technically not denounce, but along the same spirit). There is 2 off the top of my head.

Like I said, I'm an outsider looking in on all this. I can only ask my questions to gain insight.
Peace

Benny

[Muhammad]

Greetings Benny,

Probably, That's why I'm here to dispell all the steriotypes in my mind that I've seen and have been exposed to.

I am glad you are open minded about that then :).

There was that rushdie dude that wrote that book. they were hunting him down. There's the gunmen that protest the cartoon publishers (technically not denounce, but along the same spirit). There is 2 off the top of my head.

There is a slight confusion here, which I think we need to clarify. There are some people who debate matters of religion with members of other faiths in a respectful, evidence-based manner to promote understanding and sometimes try to make known the distinction between what is true and what cannot be. I believe this is the case with Dr. Zakir Naik.

Other people produce slanderous, blasphemous publications such as books and magazines which serve no purpose other than mere entertainment and totally lack any respect or evidence. Hence it is these that create hatred.

So to conclude: it is most acceptable to have people discuss matters in a civilised way, but outright insult is not tolerated by anyone.

Peace.

[Benny]

Greetings Benny,

I am glad you are open minded about that then :).

I'm trying to be at every moments of my life.

There is a slight confusion here, which I think we need to clarify. There are some people who debate matters of religion with members of other faiths in a respectful, evidence-based manner to promote understanding and sometimes try to make known the distinction between what is true and what cannot be. I believe this is the case with Dr. Zakir Naik.

I understand, but it in fact, the good dr is saying that Christianity is a lie if I'm reading correctly. I think they believe that the resurection is the heart of thier belief.(from what I understand). I think I'm confused about this.

Other people produce slanderous, blasphemous publications such as books and magazines which serve no purpose other than mere entertainment and totally lack any respect or evidence. Hence it is these that create hatred.

---

It's good to hear that people are speaking out. You have any links or sites I can see? The news here has yet to mention it. I'd like to pass it along to the the record straight about that.

So to conclude: it is most acceptable to have people discuss matters in a civilised way, but outright insult is not tolerated by anyone.

Peace.

I dig what you're saying. If it seems I'm insulting, then you are mistaken. I'm just trying to understand better.
thanks for the clarifications,

Peace,
Benny

[Mohsin]

I understand, but it in fact, the good dr is saying that Christianity is a lie if I'm reading correctly. I think they believe that the resurection is the heart of thier belief.(from what I understand). I think I'm confused about this.

Yes we don't believe in chrstianity, we believe its a lie that Jesus PBUH was resurrected, if we did believe that we wouldn't be muslim....we would be christian!
Similarly christians don't believe in Prophet Muhammed PBUH, they don't believe he was a prophet, they think he was a liar and they think islam is false, so hence they are not muslims.....they're christians
So theres nothing wrong with Dr Naik saying Jesus PBUH was not crucified

Anyway i think you're confused on what is Dr Naiks purpose, he believes in christianity and in prophet Jesus PBUH, but according to islam he wasn't crucified, and he's trying to prove it to christians using their bible. if it says in the bible he wasn't crucified then how can he possibly be saying christianity is a lie

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

It's good to hear that people are speaking out. You have any links or sites I can see? The news here has yet to mention it. I'd like to pass it along to the the record straight about that.

Have a look at today's story, and also see the following:

Muslim leader condemns protesters

Pressure on police over protest
...
Meanwhile, Inayat Bunglawala, a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain, said that Muslims would be in favour of arresting those who waved offensive placards or banners.
He told Channel 4 News: "I think the police were right to have taken footage of the event and identified the ringleaders, because although several hundred people were there, the actual placards were being held by a tiny group of extremists."
He added: "Those extremists who were inciting violence were trying to hijack genuine feelings amongst Muslims for a more violent agenda.
"There will be no sympathy for them when they are charged by the police."

The Labour MP Shahid Malik, who is on the Home Affairs Select Committee, wrote a letter to Sir Ian Blair, head of the Met Police, on Friday calling for prosecutions.
He said he had every confidence suitable action would be taken.
Mr Malik added: "Police are professionals at dealing with crowd and disorder matters and I think they're best placed to make those kinds of judgements. "I believe that prosecutions should follow. No matter how much offence cartoons may or may not cause, it can never justify violence." SOURCE

Dr Yunes Teinaz is the spokesman for the London Mosque and Islamic Cultural Centre
...

Muslim governments have the right to boycott Danish and Norwegian goods. On the other hand, the way forward is to solve this amicably. Any violent threats against Danish, or other, people are completely unacceptable. We believe the governments that allowed these freedoms to be abused should apologise to the Muslim communities. SOURCE

I dig what you're saying. If it seems I'm insulting, then you are mistaken. I'm just trying to understand better.

No, I didn't mean you were insulting... I was referring to the insulting behaviour demonstrated by the Danish media group and the likes of Salman Rushdie. We can accept criticism, but there is a point beyond which criticism becomes insult.

Peace.

[Benny]

No, I didn't mean you were insulting... I was referring to the insulting behaviour demonstrated by the Danish media group and the likes of Salman Rushdie. We can accept criticism, but there is a point beyond which criticism becomes insult.

Peace.

Thanks for the links!.... And thanks for not saying I'm insulting. I dont mean to convey anything insulting in my posts. I'll pass the links along. The question I have is: When is murder an option for someone that insults you? Salman Rushdie was threathened for writing a book. That's about absurd if you ask me. If you dont like the book dont read it. if you dont like the music, turn the channel. I don't feel a need to kill anyone that insults me.

Peace,
Benny

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

Thanks for the links!....

You're very welcome :).

The question I have is: When is murder an option for someone that insults you? Salman Rushdie was threathened for writing a book. That's about absurd if you ask me.

Please see the following links:

Why is the apostate to be executed in Islam?

Apostasy: Definition & Ruling

The reasons for capital punishment in Islam

If you dont like the book dont read it. if you dont like the music, turn the channel. I don't feel a need to kill anyone that insults me.

The problem with publishing something such as a newspaper or book is that turning your face away will not stop it being broadcasted to a very large number of people. When such a publication constitutes slander and insult against a belief, then it is important to correct such things - by peaceful, Islamic means of course.

I have already clarified that the violence being portrayed by some Muslims is not justified for the cause and killing someone for an insult is not an idea that has been enforced by anyone here.

Btw, I found another link regarding Muslims condemning the violence:

http://www.islamonline.net/English/N...rticle01.shtml

I hope this helps,

Peace.

[QURBAN]

Sister Hana, he's trying to refute the christians thought using the bible, i'm saying we as muslims don't believe that he got crucified, or that he got crucificted, which is what Dr Naik is trying to prove. We don't believe he survived the attempted crucifiction because as muslims we believe he was raised up alive, so i don't know why Dr Naik is trying to prove something we don't believe, regardless of wether it proves the Christian way of thought to be wrong
Anyway my question was what is the muslim perspective on the person that spoke to the disciples after the alleged crucifiction, because as muslims we obviously don't believe it was Jesus AS, as he was raised up, so who is this person? is this story made up? It just seems weird that so many people together made up such a story


Zakir Naik proved his assertions that he got crucificted, rather than crucified in a debate. He proved it using the Bible. The talk isn't actually available on the net, but there is one by Ahmed Deedat, who was Dr Naiks teacher. You can listen to that here, its called "Crucifixion Or Crucifiction"
http://is.aswatalislam.net/DisplayFi...e=Ahmed_Deedat

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful!

Praise be to Allah,
the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;


Peace to those who follow the Guidence!

Christian’s belief in the end result of the Crucifixion is that the Messiah (PBUH) died-

Doctor Zakir Naik and Ahmed Deedat in their respective lectures were questioning the end result of the Crucifixion, i.e. whether Jesus (PBUH) died or not- Not whether the Crucifixion event happened, hence the title of their debate- Crucifixion or CruciFiction

Fiction Means Invented story, they were questioning climax of the story, i.e. whether Jesus Died or not.

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Holy Quran Surah Nisa 4:157


After reading Surah Nisa 4:157 a reader may conclude that Allah (SWT) has Himself Revealed in His Own Words the;

"substitution of 'Isa (Jesus) with another man".

The wordings of the original Arabic text do not categorically speak of "substitution of 'Isa (a.s.) with another man".

Below are the other English translations by Muslims and non Muslim scholars for comparison:

1. Translation by Allama Abdullah Yusuf Ali:
"But they killed him not, nor crucified him,
only a likeness of that was shown to them."

2. Translation by Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall:
"...They slew him not nor crucified
but it appeared so unto them;"
3. Translation by Professor Arthur J. Arberry:
"...yet they did not slay him, neither crucified him,
only a likeness of that was shown to them."


In the above English translations the translators have refrained from advocating any specific theory since Allah (SWT) has not mentioned any of the prevalent theories on the subject in this verse or anywhere else in the Qur'an. (I repeat "in the Qur'an").

Muslim scholars have in the past advocated more than one theory which can be also regarded as an applicable interpretations of the phrase "but a likeness of that was shown to them". As for an example, Sheikh Ahmed Deedat had written a well publicized booklet 'Crucifixion or Cruci-fiction' based upon the so called "Swoon Theory".
(The word "swoon" means; to faint).

Dr Zakir Naik, also used the same arguments in his debate-

It is not my place to judge or to declare which theory is the Reality. All I am trying to emphasize is that since Allah (SWT) has not categorically declared "Jesus was substituted with another man", the factual translation should leave the doors open for the alternate theory or theories.. In Surah Al- 'Imran (3), verse 7, Allah (SWT) clearly reveals that no one knows "the true meanings" of the verses that are not entirely clear, except Allah.

Allah knows the Realities...

[Mohsin]

The crucifixion should also be considered from the Romans' side. They were neither Jews nor Christians. Do you think they would have crucified a non-entity or a ghost? If the crucifixion did happen then there must have been someone on the cross. The question is who?

Like Br. said, God put someone else on the cross. It is said he gave the likeness of Prophet Jesus PBUH's face to one of his companions, and Jesus PBUH was risen up. So one of his companions who appeared to look like Jesus PBUH was crucified.
It's quite clear it wasn't Jesus PBUh on the cross anyway, if you read the bible it claims Jesus PBUH said "My God why have you forsaken me"
I mean would a prophet say this to his lord, or a son say this to his apparent father, they world surely have the greatest faith and trust in God
Anyway it doesn't seem like i'll be getting the answer to my question, Allah Knows Best i guess

[- Qatada -]

One could also wonder why the new Christian religion spread like bushfire and their members were ready to sacrifice themselves as "shahids", if it was based on the crucifixion of the wrong person.

Its kinda simple. Most of the christians think they'll get to paradise no matter what they do in this life. They feel that they dont have to perform any sacrifices in this life, as long as you believe that Jesus will grant you paradise because you believed in him. This appeals to the people who have alot in this life, but still - most of the people who aren't having a good time in this life feel that there is a reason for this life - why are we alive if Jesus (peace be upon him) was going to grant me paradise anyway?


This life is here for a reason.


Us muslims believe that this life is a test from Allaah Almighty (God.) He sent us to this world, and we all have to try our best to strive to get to paradise. This means, sacrificing your wealth to support the needy, and to worship God alone without any partners. This means fighting in jihad (to end all oppression) and to enjoin people to the truth (to islamic monotheism.)

A person wont get paradise just because he believes, but because they have done righteous deeds aswell as believing in monotheism. Its like an exam, and whoever gets the pass & gets most marks (more good deeds), will get a higher rank in paradise. Whereas a person with less, will get a lower rank in paradise (each equal to their level of deeds in this life.)


However, whoever rejects Allaah Almighty (God) as the true God without any partners. They will get the hellfire due to their rejection of God. Why should God grant paradise to the one who rejected Him Almighty?


Hope you understand what i mean :)


wa Allaahu a'lam. (and Allaah Almighty knows best.)


Peace.

[QURBAN]

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful!

Praise be to God,
the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;



Peace to those who follow the Guidance!

Benny, it looks like you have been banned, May Allah guide you in your quest for the truth-

for the rest of our Christians friends who might share the same views- first of all I would like to Thank you for giving us the opportunity to communicate and discuss the truth which we all need to know and follow. It is only by means of this, I mean by knowing the truth and following it, that we can free ourselves of our sins, as it says in your Bible:

“Then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free”

John 8:31 – New International Version (NIV)


A family decides to hold a picnic on top of a very high hill , and some one else was also present in that place, he was leaning against the tree, near the edge of the hill, and admiring the view from the top, during which the family are busy enjoying their picnic- after a while the baby starts to crawl away from his family members, and towards the edge of the hill, before too long the mother notices that her baby is very close to the edge, and starts screaming at the man to stop the baby- but he just stands their minding his own business and let the inevitable happen-

Baby is unaware of the path he has taken, which will to lead to a tragic end, but the man knows better- now he can mind his own business and let it be, or try and help the baby back to the right path-

Muslims believe that the Holy Quran is the word of God, and its against the Christians belief.

““Surely, they have disbelieved who say: ‘Allaah is the Messiah [‘Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary).’ But the Messiah [‘Eesa (Jesus)] said: ‘O Children of Israel! Worship Allaah, my Lord and your Lord.’ Verily, whosoever sets up partners (in worship) with Allaah, then Allaah has forbidden Paradise to him, and the Fire will be his abode. And for the Zaalimoon (polytheists and wrongdoers) there are no helpers”

[al-Maa'idah 5:72] “


and I am sure the Christians Belief that the Bible is the word of God, and they believe the Muslims are the ones in darkness.

You see both of us cannot be right, if we both believe in one God then he wont send two contradictory messages- two paths going opposite direction cannot lead to the same place- we believe that we are on the right path, and we fill its our duty to advise our fellow Christians Brothers/Sisters, not just mind our own business, admiring the view like the selfish guy did in my little story.

“Say (O Muhammad): ‘O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians): Come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but Allaah (Alone), and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allaah.’ Then, if they turn away, say: ‘Bear witness that we are Muslims’”

Aal ‘Imraan 3:64


What Dr Zakir Naik was doing is inviting people to the Truth, by refuting the death of Christ on the Cross; the rebuttal was put forward with Proofs\Evidence from the bible, which he probably felt would have a stronger impact on the Christians audience then if he provided it from the Holy Quran.

And Allah Knows Best

[Mohsin]

Why has Benny been banned, what's he done wrong?

[TSpot]

He sent us to this world, and we all have to try our best to strive to get to paradise. This means, sacrificing your wealth to support the needy, and to worship God alone without any partners. This means fighting in jihad (to end all oppression) and to enjoin people to the truth (to islamic monotheism.)

This is what most Christians believe. There are definitional differences. For example, I assume you would consider Jesus a partner. In Christian belief he is not a partner but at the same time He and God are one (through the Trinity). Ending oppression, sacrificing wealth are all also Christian tenets. Jihad, as it is used by many Muslims, is not particularly Christian (killing of innocents) but certainly many Christians have used their faith to justify sins as well. There is also a call to to the truth and to be more evangelical, but obviously not to Islamic monotheism.

You are incorrect that all Christians agree that simple belief gets one to Paradise. In fact, that is relatively uncommon. Many churches believe that they are the one true religion and that only their members achieve that goal. My own tradition does believe in a loving and forgiving God and that Paradise after death is reserved for those who truly believe and repent. Certainly that can lead to many to think that nothing they do on earth matters as long as they make a repentence, and they may be right--it is, after all, up to God only. It does not release us from our duty, however. As humans, we will make mistakes. We should strive to be perfect but none of us are.

[- Qatada -]

Hey TSpot.


Thanks for clarifying that, we believe similarly to alot of things you mentioned. The only part that makes christianity so hard to believe is the fact that people say that Jesus (peace be upon him and his beloved family) is part of God.

Its just too hard to believe, and what about the prophets before that? Why does God have to come in human form, then get killed by people to show that hes forgave all their sins? Can't he just forgive if a person turns to repentance, instead of showing weakness?


The most easiest/believable fact is that Jesus (peace be upon him) was a prophet from God, and so were the prophets before him, and after him. They all came to preach the message of Almighty Allaah, and that was their only duty. God having any other deity doesn't make sense at all.


Thats how I, and the majority of the muslims feel.


wa Allaahu a'lam. (and Allaah Almighty knows best.)


Peace.

[- Qatada -]

If christianity were such an easy religion that it spread so quickly, why then did the christians from the Middle-East convert en masse to islam? Because it was an easier religion than christianity?

Maybe they believed that islam was the real way of life, whereas christianity never made sense? :) Monotheism involves believing and worshipping one God Alone, and not a human. Maybe worshipping the 'human' made them confused?

Thats one of the things that makes alot of christians turn away from faith. Just check the revert/convert stories thread out. And you'll realise why most people leave it. :)

[TSpot]

Thanks for clarifying that, we believe similarly to alot of things you mentioned. The only part that makes christianity so hard to believe is the fact that people say that Jesus (peace be upon him and his beloved family) is part of God.

I do not want to get too much into this for fear that it might be viewed as proselytizing, which is not my intention. The concept of the Holy Trinity can be difficult for even Christians to understand, since it is so different from our human urges for clear taxonomy. In fact, many Christian traditions essentially give up on this and almost substitute Jesus for God in many ways. Even those who believe, as I do, in the Trinity, often find it easier to relate to Jesus and His suffering. But we do not believe that he is a partner.

You say it is hard to believe and you may be right. However, I would counter that the difficulty of a belief does not make it any more or less worthy. Athiests would say that we are both wrong because any belief in God is more difficult than not believing--especially if one strives to live as He would want us to.

In the end, we are talking about faith. It is not possible for mere humans to prove the existence of God and it is arrogant to try, IMO. God's greatness is beyond human understanding.

In any case, I am not here to preach and am not worthy to do so. I was hoping to point out that, at the core, Christians and Muslims have very similar beliefs. There are differences, of course, but we shouldn't forget the similarities.

[- Qatada -]

Hey again.


I agree with your point that alot of atheists will say that its too hard to prove that there really is a God that exists. The only difference is that, they will keep saying this due to the fact that they reject God.

But for the believers, this is a totally different thing, and we know that if a person takes one step to the direction towards God, (wanting to believe) - God will take a even bigger step towards you. And the people who reject God, are like the dumb, deaf and the blind - because they reject all the signs of God. Just looking around the world/skies/seas is solid proof to show that there is a greater Being that exists, who created everything out of nothing.


So whoever doesn't want to believe, God doesn't need to come close to them, and whoever has the real intention of wanting to get closer to God; then God will allow him/her to come closer. Its as simple as that :)


Peace.

[Mohsin]

Jihad, as it is used by many Muslims, is not particularly Christian (killing of innocents)

what are you talking about?
Killing of innocents is not "particularly" islam either. In islam whoever kills someone innocent, it's as if he's killed the whole of mankind. Islam doesn't permitt killing of innocents

I assume you would consider Jesus a partner. In Christian belief he is not a partner but at the same time He and God are one

What do you mean sorry that we consider Jesus a partner. i don't quite understand what you mean by this verse

We find it hard to believe Jesus PBUH is son of god, since he never himself claimed divinity in the bible, he in fact said he was sent as a prophet. To me i just can't get around the concept of trinity, how it's 3 in one but not 3 Gods one God, it makes much more sense to me that he was a prophet, just like others and was sent by god

[TSpot]

what are you talking about?
Killing of innocents is not "particularly" islam either. In islam whoever kills someone innocent, it's as if he's killed the whole of mankind. Islam doesn't permitt killing of innocents

That is why I used Muslims and not Islam. Recent history is replete with innocents being killed in the name of Jihad. I did not say that this was a tenet of Islam, but it certainly occurs.

What do you mean sorry that we consider Jesus a partner. i don't quite understand what you mean by this verse

Just what I said: I assume that the original poster, when referring to 'partner gods' meant Jesus. He did not correct me in subsequent posts, so it was probably not far off the mark.

We find it hard to believe Jesus PBUH is son of god, since he never himself claimed divinity in the bible, he in fact said he was sent as a prophet. To me i just can't get around the concept of trinity, how it's 3 in one but not 3 Gods one God, it makes much more sense to me that he was a prophet, just like others and was sent by god

You believe what you believe. I have no issue with that. As I said, I am not trying to change anyone's beliefs. As to whether Jesus said he was the son of God (or even God) or just a prophet, it is probably not worth going into here. From my reading of the Bible (even in Greek) I have my own beliefs. Yours are obviously different.

[Mohsin]

That is why I used Muslims and not Islam. Recent history is replete with innocents being killed in the name of Jihad. I did not say that this was a tenet of Islam, but it certainly occurs.

Ok i see what you meant now, but would just like to say Brother don't misuse the word jihad, it doesn't mean killing innocent people

Just what I said: I assume that the original poster, when referring to 'partner gods' meant Jesus. He did not correct me in subsequent posts, so it was probably not far off the mark.

We don't believe he's a partner of God, or son or anything, a prophet that's all
Btw i was the oriinal poster, where did i say partner Gods, and everyone probably didn't understand what you meant, because you're way off the mark, it is a pillar of our faith not to have any partners to God

You believe what you believe. I have no issue with that. As I said, I am not trying to change anyone's beliefs.

Surely if you elive your beliefs are right and the way to god, then surely you would want to share them with others, and also have them on the straight path. "What you love for yourself, you love for your Brother" remember

As to whether Jesus said he was the son of God (or even God) or just a prophet, it is probably not worth going into here. From my reading of the Bible (even in Greek) I have my own beliefs. Yours are obviously different.

Well we are in a forum, so isn't the whole point of discussing it rather than not going into it

[TSpot]

Ok i see what you meant now, but would just like to say Brother don't misuse the word jihad, it doesn't mean killing innocent people

I know it does not and I apologize if I gave the impression that I did.

it is a pillar of our faith not to have any partners to God

I understand. I was responding to:

This means, sacrificing your wealth to support the needy, and to worship God alone without any partners. This means fighting in jihad (to end all oppression) and to enjoin people to the truth (to islamic monotheism.)

Which I took to mean that Christians believe in a partner to God. My point was that, if the worship of Jesus and God is meant by that, we do not consider them different, but one and the same--with the Holy Spirit, one God. Here it is from the Nicene Creed:

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.

I apologize if that is more confusing, but the key parts are "one God" and "one Being with the Father".

Surely if you elive your beliefs are right and the way to god, then surely you would want to share them with others, and also have them on the straight path. "What you love for yourself, you love for your Brother" remember

True--and I do. However, I leave open the possiblilty that, since I am human, I may be wrong. The right way will be shown to all in God's time, not ours. Besides, I would be banned in about 10 seconds if I tried to convert you fine folks.

Well we are in a forum, so isn't the whole point of discussing it rather than not going into it

I am trying to discuss it, but not to do so in a way that is prosetyzing. My point is that Christianity and Islam are very similar. I strongly feel that in this world we should work together to point out the similarities. People have used both for their own ends (some not so good) but I think we should try to work together to promote understanding and stop violence.

[Mohsin]

True--and I do. However, I leave open the possiblilty that, since I am human, I may be wrong. The right way will be shown to all in God's time, not ours.

Firstly we should go out and find the truth, atht is the purpose of our life, it isn't always for God to give it to us on a plate. we should go out in search of the truth. Now both christianity and islam talk about heaven/hell, now when soooooo much is at stake, you can't express in words how much is at stake -Heaven forever or the painful torment of hell forvever, when this at at stake don't you think consideration about this is required, i mean if you're not sure about your faith and you may be wrong then maybe you should remain open and look elsewhere aswell
You could wait and wait for that time to come when God shows you the truth, but what if you were to die earlier than expected, then tis too late, and you're infront of God, and he's asking you why you didn't go out in search of the truth if you weren't sure about your own way of life

Besides, I would be banned in about 10 seconds if I tried to convert you fine folks

Lol no course you wouldn't, christians come here all the time and express their views. I've found this forum is extremely open to discussion and dialogue, but when people just start insulting and abusing then people get banned

[Turin Turambar]

Hey TSpot.


Thanks for clarifying that, we believe similarly to alot of things you mentioned. The only part that makes christianity so hard to believe is the fact that people say that Jesus (peace be upon him and his beloved family) is part of God.

Its just too hard to believe, and what about the prophets before that? Why does God have to come in human form, then get killed by people to show that hes forgave all their sins? Can't he just forgive if a person turns to repentance, instead of showing weakness?


The most easiest/believable fact is that Jesus (peace be upon him) was a prophet from God, and so were the prophets before him, and after him. They all came to preach the message of Almighty Allaah, and that was their only duty. God having any other deity doesn't make sense at all.


Thats how I, and the majority of the muslims feel.


wa Allaahu a'lam. (and Allaah Almighty knows best.)


Peace.

I am a Christian and I think I can help you with some of your questions. God decided to suffer for us a sign of His love for us. It is similar to what an eartly lover would do for the object of his/her love and do something really difficult in order to show that he/she is in love.
In Christianity God loves us, we are not slaves who have to obey but children who are loved. And God has no problem in showing weakness, in fact, he shows His strength in that weakness. In He who has all the strength weakness is a sign of love. For instance when an earthly parent is playing with his child, he will "let them win". Of course he can win the game whenever he wants, but he will let himself be defeated as a proof of love.
One of the key differences between our religions is that Christianity is based on a God who loves and children who love in return. And Islam is based on a God who orders and slaves who obey those orders.

[*Hana*]

Peace:

God decided to suffer for us a sign of His love for us. It is similar to what an eartly lover would do for the object of his/her love and do something really difficult in order to show that he/she is in love.

Why are you trying to apply human attributes to God? What you fail to understand is that God does not NEED us, WE need Him. He can destroy any one of us and create a new one faster than we can blink. His love and mercy is said through His words. He tells us...it's enough. Whether we choose to accept it, is completely up to us.

In Christianity God loves us, we are not slaves who have to obey but children who are loved. And God has no problem in showing weakness, in fact, he shows His strength in that weakness. In He who has all the strength weakness is a sign of love. For instance when an earthly parent is playing with his child, he will "let them win".

Are you saying in Islam, God doesn't love?? We SUBMIT to the will of God. If by "slave" you are referring to the fact that as Muslims we strive to live as He has ordained and worship Him as He tells us we should....then I'm PROUD to be called a slave. :)

God is NEVER weak. Astagfurillah. How can you even suggest He has weaknesses? :confused: God needs to prove nothing!! The love of God cannot be even remotely compared to the love between parent and child. You can't begin to put God on the same level as His creations and by doing that putting His creations on the same level as God!

One of the key differences between our religions is that Christianity is based on a God who loves and children who love in return. And Islam is based on a God who orders and slaves who obey those orders.

The key difference between our beliefs is that we still follow what all messengers and prophets have taught....There is only ONE God. Followers of the true teachings Jesus, pbuh, had laws too. A little thing called the 10 commandments. :) Paul, a self proclaimed disciple, changed what Jesus, pbuh, taught and that's what you follow today. Islam teaches the love and mercy of Allah, swt, is far greater than his anger. Who are the ones that love God? The ones that follow what HE has ordained or the ones that follow what a man has ordained? Be sure....if I have to choose whose law I should follow.....it won't be Paul's law. I will follow what came from God. I highly suggest you do the same. :)

Let me ask you something. If we took someone who was with Jesus, pbuh, and followed Him, and put that same person in the world today, who would he believe were the true followers of Jesus, pbuh?

1. Who prostrates during prayer? Muslims
2. Who performs ablution? Muslims
3. Who teaches the oneness of God? Muslims
4. Who submits their will to God? Muslims

Think about that. :)

Peace,
Hana

[Turin Turambar]

To Hana_Aku, thanks for your answer.

Of course God doesn't NEED us, but he LOVES us. If you have a son yourself, you will not need him, but you will love him. And you will be willing to sacrifice for him. That is exactly the relation we Christians have with God, and that is why we are always calling ourselves his children. It is Muslims all over the Internet who insist on calling themselves "slaves". Do you really want to be an slave? Do you think that a master of slaves is something good, something to be admired? Or is a loving father far better?

The love of God CAN be compared to that of an earthly father...if you are careful with the comparison. Remember that God made us in His likeness, so in everything we are we can find at least a shadow of His own nature. There is nothing wrong with that. In fact when you Muslims compare Him to a master of slaves, you are also using an earthly comparison. It is only that the comparison we Christians use is so much better and fitting for a world in which there aren't slaves any more! Perhaps that is one of the reasons why slavery lasted for so long in Islamic countries and why is still going on in places like Sudan. If you think that God is a master of slaves, slavery will look very natural and you will keep it for ever!

Finally, about weaknesses in God. Of course in principle He doesn't have any weakness in His own nature. But he can BECOME weak if he wishes to, in order to show his love for us. It is part of being almighty! He is not FORCED to be strong and powerful. He can decide to be weak, in order to suffer for those He loves. As I said, it is something anyone who is in love will do!

[shorouk]

no such thing that someone dies for ur sins ....
sow at would b ur puropse here if u are free of sins and u are all goigjto heaven??? so that means u can steal... kill etc and u end up in heaven????????????

how can god who created all of this complex wrld have a son????????
if he ddi have a son do u think he would b a human ???? just liek us???

[Turin Turambar]

Dear shorouk,

When we say that "Jesus died for our sins" what we mean is that he opened a path for us. It is still incumbent upon us to follow that path. If you kill or steal you are obviously not going to heaven, and in that case the sacrifice of Jesus would be in vain for you. But it would still be meaningful for everybody else.

Regarding God having a Son, you have to understand about the nature of the Holy Trinity in Christian thought. God the Father begets by an act of intellectual generation God the Son who is also fully God. We say that God the Son (the second person of the Trinity) is the image of God in his own mind, the concept that God has of Himself. It was God the Son, the second person of the Trinity, who became like us to renovate our world through his sacrifice. And we have seen the fruits of that renovation. The societies who followed him in that renovation developed things that had never been heard of before, such as modern technology, democracy and respect for women.

Even in your own life you are taking advantage of the fruits of the sacrifice of Jesus. Don't forget that Muhammed took many females captives and used them as sex slaves. Others he distributed as part of the booty to his followers. That was the fate of women in the past, when all humans were primitive. But the Christian societies, thanks to the inspiration of Jesus, developed a different way of dealing with women. And today women like you are free and respected (at least in non-Muslim countries) thanks to that inspiration.

[Sister Khadija]

Assalam Alakium (Peace Be With You)

Dear shorouk,

When we say that "Jesus died for our sins" what we mean is that he opened a path for us. It is still incumbent upon us to follow that path. If you kill or steal you are obviously not going to heaven, and in that case the sacrifice of Jesus would be in vain for you. But it would still be meaningful for everybody else.

Regarding God having a Son, you have to understand about the nature of the Holy Trinity in Christian thought. God the Father begets by an act of intellectual generation God the Son who is also fully God. We say that God the Son (the second person of the Trinity) is the image of God in his own mind, the concept that God has of Himself. It was God the Son, the second person of the Trinity, who became like us to renovate our world through his sacrifice. And we have seen the fruits of that renovation. The societies who followed him in that renovation developed things that had never been heard of before, such as modern technology, democracy and respect for women.

Even in your own life you are taking advantage of the fruits of the sacrifice of Jesus. Don't forget that Muhammed took many females captives and used them as sex slaves. Others he distributed as part of the booty to his followers. That was the fate of women in the past, when all humans were primitive. But the Christian societies, thanks to the inspiration of Jesus, developed a different way of dealing with women. And today women like you are free and respected (at least in non-Muslim countries) thanks to that inspiration.

First off I respect that you have your way of life as a Christian and I would hope that you would have the same respect for us in the way of life of Islam.

We should not be here to insult others beliefs or any person whether it is another member or a Prophet.

I find it rahter distuburing you would say something so negative as the following:

Don't forget that Muhammed took many females captives and used them as sex slaves. Others he distributed as part of the booty to his followers. That was the fate of women in the past, when all humans were primitive. But the Christian societies, thanks to the inspiration of Jesus, developed a different way of dealing with women. And today women like you are free and respected (at least in non-Muslim countries) thanks to that inspiration.

There is no evidence of Muhammed (SAW) doing such a thing. If he was so bad, then why would the United States Supreme Court depict a postive image of him above their court bench? It was to honor him.

There is no basis of your "facts". These maybe your opinions, but opinions like this should be kept to yourself out of respect for us Brothers and Sisters. You are on an Islamic Forum and that was not a nice thing to say. I could say a lot og things about false Prophets like Joseph Smith and the Mormons. But, since those who are Mormon choose that way of life, I am no better than a Sinner if I condemn someone else. That is GOD's job.

Salaam (Peace)
Sister Khadija:sister:

[Turin Turambar]

Dear Sister Khadija,

I assure you that it wasn't my intention to offend anybody. When I said that I was only repeating what I had read in the Hadith, which are now available to anybody on the Internet. You can find the same if you look for it. There is no doubt at all that Muhammed captured women and distributed them among his followers, as part of the general distribution of the booty. And that he kept some for himself and had them as concubines. Those are things that any scholar of Islam would agree with.

You get me wrong if you think I want to offend anybody. Let alone women like you. It is on the contrary, because I respect women tremendously that I want them to learn about how different people have behaved in relation to women in the past. Women should stand for their rights and never allow men to trample on them.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

It is Muslims all over the Internet who insist on calling themselves "slaves". Do you really want to be an slave?

A Muslim considers himself or herself the 'abd (servant/slave) of God. The exact same word has been used for the following people in the Bible:

Abraham (Genesis 26:24), Jacob (Isaiah 41:8), Moses (Deuteronomy 34:5, Joshua 1:1), David (2 Samuel 7:8, 1 Kings 8:25), Job (Job 1:8), Isaiah (Isaiah 20:3), and Jesus (Acts 3:13).

If being called 'slave' or 'servant' of God was good enough for these noble Prophets, it's good enough for me.

And btw, if you disagree that the word for these prophets is the same word Muslims use, then know that I checked the arabic translation of the Bible and the word is also 'abd, just like Islam.

Regards

[Turin Turambar]

To Ansar Al-'Adl:

You are probably right when you say that the same word (or at least one related to it in those languages) was used in the Old Testament. I frankly don't any Arabic, Aramaic or even Greek to follow you there, but I don't think it is really relevant and I will show you why.

The New Testament is a different thing and it is the important thing for us. Jesus NEVER referred to us as "slaves of God". On the contrary, he scandalized the Jews of his times by addressing God using a word that today would be the equivalent of "Dad". By that he was showing us how beautiful and exalted our position was going to be after His sacrifice. We would never again be "slaves", we would be "sons". Don't you see there the beginning of the incredible change in human affairs that would develop in Christian countries and that later fructified in things like "The Declaration of Human Rights"? Sons have rights, slaves don't. Isn't it natural that the subjects of Saudi Arabia are in esentially the position of slaves with respect to their rulers? It makes perfect sense to me, since for Islam we are after all slaves anyway. My point is still valid, the followers of Islam call themselves "slaves" and the rulers of Muslim countries will make sure that they stay in exactly that position. The followers of Christianity call themselves "sons" and by that they have created the modern western societies in which everybody can aspire (at least theoretically) to the same respect he receives in his own family.

BTW, I saw your post in the other thread. I admire your erudition on the subject but I still think I can give you good arguments. However, since your post is kind of long I will need to finish reading it before answering and that might take some time....;)

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi Turin,
You have't shown me why my point is irrelevant. If all the noble Prophets and pious people were called slaves of God, then its good enough for me.

Regards

[Sister Khadija]

Dear Sister Khadija,

I assure you that it wasn't my intention to offend anybody. When I said that I was only repeating what I had read in the Hadith, which are now available to anybody on the Internet. You can find the same if you look for it. There is no doubt at all that Muhammed captured women and distributed them among his followers, as part of the general distribution of the booty. And that he kept some for himself and had them as concubines. Those are things that any scholar of Islam would agree with.

You get me wrong if you think I want to offend anybody. Let alone women like you. It is on the contrary, because I respect women tremendously that I want them to learn about how different people have behaved in relation to women in the past. Women should stand for their rights and never allow men to trample on them.

Thank you for your response, it is very much appreciated.


Please quote for me your eveidence from the Hadith and evidence from Islamic Scholars that agree.

You have to understand something about the Hadith. It was not protected like the Qur'an. A lot of man made changes has happend. If what we read in Hadith contradicts the Qur'an it is disregarded as incorrect information.

I never have and am sure never will hear of an Islamic Scholar would agree with such a statment. But please, give us some quotes you have read on the matter. I believe you see a lot of junk websites of people trying to break down the religion becasue they do not like Islam.

Have you read the Chapter of Women in the Qur'an? We are so special in Islam, we have our own Chapter and will go Paradise even before the men.

In Islam, woman has a high status which no past nation ever achieved and which no subsequent nation has been able to attain, because the honour which Islam gives to humanity includes men and women equally. They are equal before the rulings of Allaah in this world and they will be equal with regard to His reward and punishment in the Hereafter. Allaah says (interpretation of the meanings):

“And indeed We have honoured the Children of Adam”

[al-Isra’ 17:70]

“There is a share for men and a share for women from what is left by parents and those nearest related”

[al-Nisa’ 4:7]

“And they (women) have rights (over their husbands as regards living expenses) similar (to those of their husbands) over them (as regards obedience and respect) to what is reasonable”

[al-Baqarah 2:228]

“The believers, men and women, are Awliya’ (helpers, supporters, friends, protectors) of one another”

[al-Tawbah 9:71]

“And your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him. And that you be dutiful to your parents. If one of them or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them a word of disrespect, nor shout at them but address them in terms of honour.

And lower unto them the wing of submission and humility through mercy, and say: ‘My Lord! Bestow on them Your Mercy as they did bring me up when I was young’”

[al-Isra’ 17:23-24]

And Allaah says (interpretation of the meanings):

“So their Lord accepted of them (their supplication and answered them), “Never will I allow to be lost the work of any of you, be he male or female”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:195]

“Whoever works righteousness — whether male or female — while he (or she) is a true believer (of Islamic Monotheism) verily, to him We will give a good life (in this world with respect, contentment and lawful provision), and We shall pay them certainly a reward in proportion to the best of what they used to do (i.e. Paradise in the Hereafter)”

[al-Nahl 16:97]

“And whoever does righteous good deeds, male or female, and is a (true) believer [in the Oneness of Allaah (Muslim)], such will enter Paradise and not the least injustice, even to the size of a Naqeera (speck on the back of a date stone), will be done to them”

[al-Nisa’ 4:124]

There is nothing in any other religion, nation or law that can compare to the honour which woman gains in Islam. The Roman civilization decreed that woman was a slave who belonged to man, and had no rights at all. In Rome a major synod met to discuss the case of woman, and decided that she was a being who had no soul, and that therefore she would not inherit life in the Hereafter, and that she was evil.

In Athens women were regarded as chattels; they were bought and sold, and were regarded as evil, the handiwork of the devil.

The ancient laws of India state that disease, death, Hell, snake venom and fire were all better than woman. Her right to life came to an end when her husband’s – or master’s – life ended. When she saw his body burning she would throw herself into the flames; if she did not do so, she would be subject to curses.

With regard to woman in Judaism, the ruling on her in the Old Testament is as follows:

“So I turned my mind to understand,

to investigate and to search out wisdom and the scheme of things

and to understand the stupidity of wickedness

and the madness of folly.

I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare,

whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains…”

(Ecclesiastes 7:25-26 – New International Version)

It is known that the Old Testament is venerated and believed by both Jews and Christians.

This was the situation of woman in ancient times. With regard to her situation in the Middle Ages and in modern times, this will be explained by the following:

The Danish writer Wieth Kordsten explained the view of the Catholic Church towards women. He said: “During the Middle Ages very little care was given to women, following the teaching of the Catholic church which regarded woman as a second class creation.” In France, a council in 586 CE decided to research the case of woman and whether she was to be counted as human or not. After some discussion, they decided that woman was human, but she was created to serve man.

The 217th clause of the French law states the following: “A married woman – even if her marriage is based on the condition of separating what belongs to her and what belongs to her husband – is not permitted to give anything as a gift or to transfer any of her property or use it as collateral, or to take possession of anything whether in return for payment or otherwise, without her husband being a party to the contract or agreeing to it in writing.”

In England, Henry VIII forbade the English woman to read the Bible. Until 1850 CE women were not counted as citizens, and until 1882 CE they did not have any personal rights.

(Silsilat Maqaarinah al-Adyaan, by Dr. Ahmad Shalaby, vol. 3, p. 210-213)

As for contemporary woman in Europe, America and other industrial nations, she is a creature which is degraded and abused for commercial purposes. She is a feature of advertising campaigns, and things have reached a stage where she takes off her clothes in order to advertise products on posters, and she sells and displays her body according to systems devised by men, so that she is no more than an object of pleasure for them in every place.

Woman is cared for so long as she is able to give and contribute physically or mentally. When she becomes old and cannot give any more, society – individuals and institutions – forsakes her and she lives alone in her house or in a mental hospital.

Compare this – and there is no comparison – with the teachings of the Noble Qur’aan, in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The believers, men and women, are Awliya’ (helpers, supporters, friends, protectors) of one another”

[al-Tawbah 9:71]

“And they (women) have rights (over their husbands as regards living expenses) similar (to those of their husbands) over them (as regards obedience and respect) to what is reasonable”

[al-Baqarah 2:228]

“And your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him. And that you be dutiful to your parents. If one of them or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them a word of disrespect, nor shout at them but address them in terms of honour.

And lower unto them the wing of submission and humility through mercy, and say: ‘My Lord! Bestow on them Your Mercy as they did bring me up when I was young’”

[al-Isra’ 17:23-24]

Since her Lord has honoured her in this way, it is clear to all of mankind that He has created her to be a mother, a wife, a daughter and a sister, so He prescribed laws which apply exclusively to women and not men.

Salaam,
Sister Khadija

[Turin Turambar]

Sister Khadija,

Please go and check the following link. It is mantained by Muslims so you shouln't be afraid of any negative bias. You can find MANY more narrations like this one. I just didn't want to make this post too long.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamen...m/008.smt.html

Chapter 29: IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH A CAPTIVE WOMAN AFTER SHE IS PURIFIED (OF MENSES OR DELIVERY) IN CASE SHE HAS A HUSBAND, HER MARRIAGE IS ABROGATED AFTER SHE BECOMES CAPTIVE


Book 008, Number 3432:
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah her pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace te upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end).


Do you see what I am talking about? When the warriors themselves had doubts about having sex with the women captured in battle Muhammad came forward with a verse allowing them to do so. In fact, he allowed them to rape the women. Do you see any concern for the opinion of the women involved? For their feelings? Did they get any choice about whether to have sex with the warriors?

You can find DOZENS of narrations like this one. Please don't take my word and check by yourself. Do you see the link between the utter lack of respect for women manifested by Muhammad and the fact that TODAY women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia and are stoned to death in Iran and Nigeria? You don't say where you live but I am sure you
enjoy more rights than they do. Be sure not to put in danger those rights. By the mere fact of being a Muslim you give strength to those who would deprive you of your rights if they could. If you want (as I want) to worship God, there are other ways and other paths.

[abdul Majid]

[PIE]WANT INFO ON JESUS???? FROM A FORMER PRIEST'S PERSPECTIVE???

GO TO ---)> http://WWW.ISLAMTOMORROW.COM

[B]VERY GOOD...MAY I SUGGEST THE "COMMON SENSE" VIDEO!!!![B][/PIE]

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Turin,
The claim you have made with regard to female captives has actyually already been refuted here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...ave-girls.html

Please read the thread and the explanations found therein.

Peace

[Sister Khadija]

Sister Khadija,

Please go and check the following link. It is mantained by Muslims so you shouln't be afraid of any negative bias. You can find MANY more narrations like this one. I just didn't want to make this post too long.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamen...m/008.smt.html

Chapter 29: IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH A CAPTIVE WOMAN AFTER SHE IS PURIFIED (OF MENSES OR DELIVERY) IN CASE SHE HAS A HUSBAND, HER MARRIAGE IS ABROGATED AFTER SHE BECOMES CAPTIVE


Book 008, Number 3432:
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah her pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace te upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end).


Do you see what I am talking about? When the warriors themselves had doubts about having sex with the women captured in battle Muhammad came forward with a verse allowing them to do so. In fact, he allowed them to rape the women. Do you see any concern for the opinion of the women involved? For their feelings? Did they get any choice about whether to have sex with the warriors?

You can find DOZENS of narrations like this one. Please don't take my word and check by yourself. Do you see the link between the utter lack of respect for women manifested by Muhammad and the fact that TODAY women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia and are stoned to death in Iran and Nigeria? You don't say where you live but I am sure you
enjoy more rights than they do. Be sure not to put in danger those rights. By the mere fact of being a Muslim you give strength to those who would deprive you of your rights if they could. If you want (as I want) to worship God, there are other ways and other paths.

When looking at the Hadith, the translation was probably affected. WE would need a Brother or a Sister with the Hadith in Arabic.

Like I said before, you have to take the Quran and compare it to the Hadith.

In this case we need to look at the Quran as in the following quote:

"Also (prohibited to you for marriage)
Women already married
Except those that your right hand possess
Thus hath Allah ordained
(prohibitions) Against you
Except for these, all others
Are lawful, provided
You seek them in marriage
With gifts from your property
Desiring chastity, not fornication
Give them their dowry
For the enjoyment you have
Of them as a duty, but if
After a dower is prescribed you agree
Mutually (to change it)
There is no blame on you
And Allah is All-Knowing
All-wise."

Without retyping the hadith above, it is clear when looking at the entire ayah and the two preceeding it, that this ruling is about what women are lawful for MARRIAGE - NOT FORNICATION. I don't know why people would intentionally misinterpret the Arabic hadith, so I guess they made a mistake.

It is not about real fornication, rather about marriage and the fornication after the marriage.

So, this verse is directly relating to women captured after a battle with polytheists. These women became Muslim at some point and were therefore elligble for marriage. However, the companions (radi Allahu Anhum) were reluctant to marry the women because they had once been married to and were polytheists. Then the ayah was revealed to make it clear that these women could be married. Its not in the context that seems to be implied by some, ie the verse was revealed immediately after the battle. It was some time after, after the women became Muslim and after their iddah period (around 3-4 months).

You can not look at the ruled in other Countries and say women are oppressed in Islam. Rather, they are not following true Islam.


Salaam,
SisterKhadija

[Turin Turambar]

Dear Sister Khadija,

The hadith I posted is one among many that say essentially the same thing. You can read them on Muslim websites so there is no risk of biased interpretations.

There is no HINT in this hadith, or in any of the others, that it is referring to marriage. It is referring to sex, pure and simple. You know men. Do you think men, soldiers in particular, once they have a pretty young thing tied up at their feet would think about marriage? Have you met men who think like that? You are trying to defend the indefensible by seeing things that simply are not there, such as marriage or the idea that the women had previously converted to Islam.

What do you see in Islam that is so attractive that you would tie yourself in knots trying to defend it? It is the fact that it calls for worshipping the one God? Christianity does the same. Is it the fact that it says all men are brothers? Christianity says the same. Is it the fact that it ask us to be kind and truthful in our dealings with each other? Christianity does the same.

I will tell you what Islam has that Christianity doesn't have.

It has the hadith allowing the raping of female captives.

[*Hana*]

Turin:

Did you forget to read what brother Ansar posted for you to read??? Amazing you keep making those slanderous, false comments when you have been proven wrong.

You trying to convert the sister or what?? I think she's a bit smarter than to fall for the, Christians believe in one God too, comment, and they're all the same except for this ONE bad part, (which is a false statement).

Did you forget the part of the bible that says if a man rapes a woman and he is caught, he must marry her and is never allowed to divorce? This is women's rights? :heated: Did you forget that women are to cover their hair in church or have it shaved off? Did you forget that women are not permitted to speak in church? Did you forget that women exist only for man?

Sorry, Islam raises women way above that and gives us equal status. Alhamdulillah, I found Islam and am no longer oppressed by biblical writings. :)

Hana

[Turin Turambar]

To Hana_Aku,

I will focus on only one thing that you said:

"women are to cover their hair in church or have it shaved off?"

Did you really say that? REALLY? We Christians are the bad guys who force our women to cover their hair? Who wears the burqa? What about the abaya? And the chador? And the more modest headscarf? What religion are the wearers of those practical and confortable items following?

Did you REALLY say that WE force our women to cover their hair?

Oh, my. This is worse than I thought.

But in any case. Just to make you sleep better at night, I will assure you that none of the followers of my religion will ever try to forcibly shave the head of a woman for exposing her hair in church. Take my word for it.
I go to a church close to where I live. I have seen women there wearing short skirts, t-shirts and shorts. No riots, no beatings. Try to dress like that when you attend a mosque. Please do, and then you tell me how did the experiment go.

If you are concerned about men forcing women to cover up you should really review your religious choices....

[*Hana*]

To Hana_Aku,

I will focus on only one thing that you said:

"women are to cover their hair in church or have it shaved off?"

Did you really say that? REALLY? We Christians are the bad guys who force our women to cover their hair? Who wears the burqa? What about the abaya? And the chador? And the more modest headscarf? What religion are the wearers of those practical and confortable items following?

Did you REALLY say that WE force our women to cover their hair?

Oh, my. This is worse than I thought.

But in any case. Just to make you sleep better at night, I will assure you that none of the followers of my religion will ever try to forcibly shave the head of a woman for exposing her hair in church. Take my word for it.
I go to a church close to where I live. I have seen women there wearing short skirts, t-shirts and shorts. No riots, no beatings. Try to dress like that when you attend a mosque. Please do, and then you tell me how did the experiment go.

If you are concerned about men forcing women to cover up you should really review your religious choices....

LOOOOOL I never said you DO it....that's my point....the BIBLE says they should....you don't follow the bible. Let me say something else, women going to church like that is disgusting and totally disrespectful. Even when I was Christian I would NEVER enter a church wearing those things. I don't know if that's something you want to be proud of, but hey, whatever.

And who exactly do you think forces me to cover? Let me assure you....there is not a man or woman on this planet that could force me to wear Hijab. Me wearing Hijab is between me and Allah. It has nothing to do with anyone forcing me. Wearing hijab is ordained by Allah, swt. It is up to me to obey Him or not. Countries that have laws about that are not following Islam. There is NO compulsion in religion. The fact that women DON'T cover their hair in church goes directly against the teachings of Christianity. You pick and choose what to follow. Your choice, not mine.
Before you come to an Islamic forum to try to convert Muslims, you might want to learn a little more about their faith. Actually, it might help if you learned a little more about your own. You wouldn't be so quick to comment on women covering in church if you knew your bible.

And, by the way...how would you know how practical or comfortable a head scarf is? You wear one lately? :rollseyes And, yes, I know many Christian women don't dress appropriately for church...but I doubt they'd want you to advertise that fact. :statisfie

Do read your bible and then learn the truth about Islam instead of speaking about things you don't know. :)

Have a lovely day. :)
Hana

[Turin Turambar]

To Hana_Aku,

But then I don't get you! In your first message you criticized Christianity because in it women are "oppressed by biblical writings". But then when I explained to you that we actually don't opress women according to biblical writings, yo said that we should!

What is exactly your criticism? That Christianity is too oppressive of women or not oppressive enough?

And a last point, according to you none of the countries that have a Muslim majority is following Islam because in all of them what a women wears is certainly not to be decided by her alone. If you don't believe me, try it yourself in any of those countries. You are proud of your freedom to wear your conservative islamic dress or not according to you own will. But perhaps that is because you live in a country that doesn't have yet a Muslim majority. Be careful.

[*Hana*]

[QUOTE=Turin Turambar;192248]To Hana_Aku,

But then I don't get you! In your first message you criticized Christianity because in it women are "oppressed by biblical writings". But then when I explained to you that we actually don't opress women according to biblical writings, yo said that we should!

Is that what I said?? You read my posts are careless as you read your bible. I was merely pointing out the fact that YOUR Bible, YOUR word of God, tells you if they don't cover shave their heads. So why are you not doing that?

What is exactly your criticism? That Christianity is too oppressive of women or not oppressive enough?

What is written in YOUR Bible about women keeps them lower than animals. Just because you don't follow YOUR word of God doesn't change the fact that the Bible degrades women and sees them as nothing more than disposable property.

And a last point, according to you none of the countries that have a Muslim majority is following Islam because in all of them what a women wears is certainly not to be decided by her alone. If you don't believe me, try it yourself in any of those countries. You are proud of your freedom to wear your conservative islamic dress or not according to you own will. But perhaps that is because you live in a country that doesn't have yet a Muslim majority. Be careful.

Funny thing that....I was in a predominately Muslim country and no one whipped me, beat me, kicked me, mocked me, etc. for not wearing Hijab. And there were plenty of women NOT wearing hijab. Saudi Arabia, although it comes the closest to following Sharia Law, has incorportated man made laws that are outside the teachings of Islam. That is NOT Islam. You cannot force people to do anything. Anything I do...good or bad, I alone will answer to on the day of judgement. It's not rocket science. You do it....you own it.

By the way, when I visited this Muslim country, I was a Christian and you can't imagine how many Muslims offered to drive me to the church so I could pray. No one blind-folded me and beat me into submission, no one scolded me for being non-muslim. I wish I could say the same about the Christian community here. Many Christians here seem to think telling me that both me and my son are going to Hell for being Muslim is the answer. How very Christ-like.....just gives you warm fuzzies, doesn't it???

Again, you speak of things where you don't have knowledge. In Islam, a woman is PROUD to cover, but you call her oppressed because she's not exposing herself like a piece of meat to drool over. The hijab is an act of faith, it protects us from men staring at our bodies and making rude comments, it gives us dignity and ensures modesty. When you approach a Muslimah you're not checking out her body, you're checking out her mind.
When a Nun covers, she's is worshipping God and honouring her faith, but Muslimahs, who do the exact same thing are considered oppressed. oh, by the way, when I was in a Muslim country, not ONCE did I fear walking down the street. EVERYONE, whether I knew them or not, was very protective and concerned of my well being. I wish I could say the same about the west, I can't.

I am PROUD to be a Muslimah, Alhamdulillah! I can assure you, a woman in Islam, particularly a mother is held in the highest esteem!

Again, I highly recommend you learn before you speak. As the saying goes, "Better to let them think you're a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." Believe it or not, I say that with all sincerety. You have very wrong ideas about Islam. As followers we are not perfect, but the religion of Islam is. Follow the teachings, not the followers.

Hana

[CAUSASIAN]

:sl:

Firstly this whole crucifiction story was written decades after the alleged "crucificition" of Jesus (PBUH), not one person wrote anything during the alleged "crucifiction".

Remember none of Jesus's (PBUH) disciples witnessed the cruxification. Except for Saint Peter, because he denied knowing Jesus (PBUH), the rest of the disciples fled for their lifes, you will know this, if you read the Bible.

Now according to the writings of Saint Peter, which is "banned" from the Bible for some reason. It also says Jesus (PBUH) was not crucified.

The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."

But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place."

But he said to me, "I have told you, "Leave the blind alone!". And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."

And I saw someone about to approach us resembling him, even him who was laughing on the tree. And he was filled with a Holy Spirit, and he is the Savior. And there was a great, ineffable light around them,and the multitude of ineffable and invisible angels blessing them. And when I looked at him, the one who gives praise was revealed.

And he said to me, "Be strong, for you are the one to whom these mysteries have been given, to know them through revelation, that he whom they crucified is the first-born, and the home of demons, and the stony vessel, in which they dwell, of Elohim, of the cross, which is under the Law. But he who stands near him is the living Savior, the first in him, whom they seized and released, who stands joyfully looking those who did him violence,while they are divided among themselves. Therefore he laughs at their lack of perception, knowing that they are born blind. So then the one susceptible to suffering shall come, since the body is the substitute.But what they released was my incorporeal body. But I am the intellectual Spirit filled with radiant light.He whom you saw coming to me is our intellectual Palermo , which unites the perfect light with my Holy Spirit."

This is exactly what Islam believes.

http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studi...oc/fgapcpt.htm

[CAUSASIAN]

About the The Apocalypse of Peter, in early Christianity, Christians believed it was spritually inspired.

Christians had more doubts about the Apocalypse of John which is the Book of Revelations in the NT, than they had about the Apocalypse of Peter.

Yet the Apocalypse of John was included in the NT, but the Apocalypse of Peter was not.

Maybe because the Apocalypse of Peter says that Jesus (PBUH) was not crucified, but someone that looked like him was crucified?

Indeed, the Apocalypse of Peter was popular and had a wide readership. The Muratorian fragment, the earliest existing list of canonic sacred writings of the New Testament, which is assigned on internal evidence to the third quarter of the second century (i.e. ca 175-200), gives a list quite similar to the modern accepted canon, but also includes the Apocalypse of Peter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse_of_Peter

[Sister Khadija]

To Hana_Aku,

But then I don't get you! In your first message you criticized Christianity because in it women are "oppressed by biblical writings". But then when I explained to you that we actually don't opress women according to biblical writings, yo said that we should!

What is exactly your criticism? That Christianity is too oppressive of women or not oppressive enough?

And a last point, according to you none of the countries that have a Muslim majority is following Islam because in all of them what a women wears is certainly not to be decided by her alone. If you don't believe me, try it yourself in any of those countries. You are proud of your freedom to wear your conservative islamic dress or not according to you own will. But perhaps that is because you live in a country that doesn't have yet a Muslim majority. Be careful.

I agree totally with Hana_Aku.

Alhamdulliah I converted from Christanity as well. No one forced me to wear Hijab, but Allah told me to and I LOVE IT! Even in my western society of Hollywood people.

I have never been more comfortable and am sp proud of covering myself.

The point here is the Bible tells the Women to cover, if they do not then they are not following the Word of GOD.

Simple as that!

Salaam,
sisterKhadija

[Kittygyal]

well as a muzlim do u have to were the scarf?

[Jason]

I always been annoyed by how some Christians think that the crucifiction was something originally thought up just for Jesus. Far from it. Crucifiction was a standard method of torture/execution used by the Romans long before Jesus's mom was even born.

After the Spartacus Rebellion, for example (yes, there really was a Spartacus :P), was put down, the surviving rebels were crucified on crosses that lined the road to Rome and their bodies were left there to rot.

And they say Vlad the Impaler was a nutjob. :P

[Kittygyal]

I always been annoyed by how some Christians think that the crucifiction was something originally thought up just for Jesus. Far from it. Crucifiction was a standard method of torture/execution used by the Romans long before Jesus's mom was even born.

After the Spartacus Rebellion, for example (yes, there really was a Spartacus :P), was put down, the surviving rebels were crucified on crosses that lined the road to Rome and their bodies were left there to rot.

And they say Vlad the Impaler was a nutjob. :P

that is true

[Sister Khadija]

well as a muzlim do u have to were the scarf?

Assalam Alakium sister islamgyal!

First, I would say you do not HAVE to do anything. Everything is a choice and it is your free will to follow it or not. The question should be Why should I wear a scarf. I feel we as Muslim women must wear Hijab and as a convert from the West, I am more than happy to do it!

Islam: Submitting our will to the will of Allah SWT

The Arabic word islam simply means "surrender (to Allah)". The essence of our religion is this surrender or submission. It requires trust on our part. Trust that Allah SWT will be there for us, trust that He knows what is best for us.

Submission to Allah SWT requires that we put Him before ourselves. That we put our desires second to His desire for us. That we acknowledge that He knows better than we do what is right for us.

Very often, such submission is difficult. Sometimes it seems that everything that happens is bad, and we wonder how Allah SWT could desire this for us. And sometimes the things He asks of us are difficult to do, either because it seems too much to ask, or because it seems pointless or out of date. In times like this, submission becomes a struggle. We really have to work to find our trust in Allah SWT. We really have to do battle with our souls to admit that what we want or what we think doesn't seem to be what's right or best. Should we bother?

For me, the answer is yes, we should bother. Allah SWT tests us. He sends difficulties our way to see how we cope. He wants to see if we will keep trying even when it's a challenge. He wants to see if we will maintain our faith in Him, and trust in Him. If we do continue to have faith and to trust in Him, then He may reward us with Jannah for our sabr, inshallah. And Jannah is the everlasting reward. Any difficulty we face in the world will seem as fleeting as a nightmare when we look back from the Hereafter, and any ease we face in the world will also seem as fleeting as a dream. We shouldn't set these fleeting states as our goal; we should set the ultimate happiness as our goal. And the ultimate happiness is Jannah.

So if we have hope of Jannah, we should persevere even when it's a struggle for us, and we should keep on trying to perfect our submission to Allah SWT. This is what the religion is about: sabr, jihad, and islam.



Quran and Sunna: The way that Allah SWT has commanded

I mentioned above that part of Islam is trusting that Allah SWT knows what is best for us, and it is submitting to His judgment even if we don't think we agree. If Allah SWT has commanded something that we don't understand or don't like, we shouldn't reject that thing. Instead, we should try to seek its wisdom for ourselves and to change our own minds.

Now, the testimony of faith that we make to become Muslims, or when we assume adult status in the deen, has two parts: laa ilaha ill'Allah and Muhammadan rasul Allah. The first of these, none has the right to be worshiped except Allah, is a statement of our belief that Allah SWT is ruler of all, judge of all, all-knowing, all-powerful. It is He who must be obeyed, and obedience to anybody else is merely conditional and must not be done if they ask us to disobey Allah SWT. And Allah SWT has given us everything we have, our existence, our life, our capabilities, our goodness. If He took any of it away, there is no power that could help us get it back. And we could never repay Him to match what He has given us, or even begin to. However, in his infinite mercy, Allah SWT asks of us only that we obey Him. Isn't it the least that we can do for Him after all that He has done for us?

There is also the second testimony, Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. The Prophet (sAas) would not be a messenger if he did not come with a message. And his message is the Quran. We are really also testifying that the Quran is a message from Allah SWT, and therefore, obedience to Allah SWT entails obedience to the Quran, because it is His word.

The Quran also tells us to obey the Prophet (sAas) as well as Allah SWT (see for example Surah an-Nisa ayah 59). It tells us that if we have faith we will take the Prophet (sAas) as the judge of any dispute (Surah an-Nisa ayah 65). It tells us that when both Allah SWT and the Prophet (sAas) have decided a matter it is not for a Muslim or Muslimah to have any further say in that matter (Surah al-Ahzab ayah 36). It tells us that what the Prophet (sAas) has given us, we should take and what he has prohibited to us, we should refrain from (Surah al-Hashr ayah 7). And it tells us that the Prophet (sAas) has been sent not just to deliver the Quran but also to explain it (Surah an-Nahl ayah 44).

How do we determine what the Prophet (sAas) has ordered, in order to obey it?

How do we find out what he judged in disputes so that we can abide by it?

How do we know what he has decided on matters, so that we can submit to it?

How do we discover what he has given, so that we can take it, or what he has prohibited, so we can abstain from it?

How do we learn how he has explained the Quran, so that we can follow that explanation and not other explanations?

The answer to all these questions is that we look at the Sunna. The Sunna is the Quran put into action by the Prophet (sAas). It shows what he ordered, judged, and decided. It shows what he has given us and what he has prohibited to us. It shows how he explained the Quran.

If we do not obey what the Prophet (sAas) has ordered, or abide by what he has judged, or submit to what he has decided, or take what he has given, or refrain from what he has prohibited, or follow his explanation of the Quran - then we have disobeyed Allah SWT.

That is why, if we are sincere about obeying Allah SWT and following His commandments, we should follow both the Quran and the Sunna.



Hijab: A commandment of the Quran and Sunna

In the first part of this article, I have argued that part of our commitment to Allah SWT is to trust that He knows what is best for us and that what He has commanded is what is right. I said that if we find ourselves disliking the way that He has set for us, our challenge is not to ignore or to try to change His command, but rather it is to seek for ourselves the wisdom in the command and to surrender to His will. If we don't like what He has commanded, we should try to change ourselves not Him. We should try to find reasons why His command is right and will be beneficial for us, and we should try to motivate ourselves through this to obey the command.

In the second part of the article, I have established why the Quran and Sunna are where we look to find what Allah SWT has commanded. Neither one can be taken alone but they both go together.

So, what do the Quran and Sunna say about hijab? There are two ayat of the Quran that deal with hijab. These are Surah an-Nur ayah 31 and Surah al-Ahzab ayah 59. Let's look at what these ayat say, and how the Prophet (sAas) has explained them.

Surah an-Nur ayah 31 says:

Wa qul li al-mu'minat yaghdudna min absarihinna wa yahfazna furujahunna wa laa yubdina zenatahunna illa maa zahara min haa wal-yadribna bi khumurihinna ala juyubihinna; wa laa yubdina zenatahunna illa li bu'ulatihinna aw aba'ihinna aw aba'i bu'ulatihinna aw abna'ihinna aw abna'i bu'ulatihinna aw ikhwanihinna aw bani ikhwanihinna aw bani akhawatihinna aw nisa'ihinna aw maa malakat aymanu hunna aw at-tabi'ina ghayri ulu'l-irbat min ar-rijal aw at-tifl alladhina lam yazharu ala awrat an-nisa wa laa yadribna bi arjulihinna li yu'lama maa yukhfina min zenatahinna. Wa tubu ilaAllahi jami'an, ayyuha al-mu'minun la'allakum tuflihun

And say to the faithful women to lower their gazes, and to guard their private parts, and not to display their beauty except what is apparent of it, and to extend their headcoverings (khimars) to cover their bosoms (jaybs), and not to display their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husband's fathers, or their sons, or their husband's sons, or their brothers, or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their womenfolk, or what their right hands rule (slaves), or the followers from the men who do not feel sexual desire, or the small children to whom the nakedness of women is not apparent, and not to strike their feet (on the ground) so as to make known what they hide of their adornments. And turn in repentance to Allah together, O you the faithful, in order that you are successful

Surah al-Ahzab ayah 59 says:

Ya ayyuha an-Nabiyy qul li azwajika wa banatika wa nisa al-mu'minin yudnina alayhinna min jalabib hinna; dhalika adna an yu'rafna fa laa yu'dhayn. Wa kana Allahu Ghafur Rahim

O Prophet! Say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the faithful to draw their outergarments (jilbabs) close around themselves; that is better that they will be recognized and not annoyed. And God is ever Forgiving, Gentle.

Together, these two ayat lay out seven commandments for Muslim sisters:

"to lower their gazes"
"to guard their private parts"
"not to display their beauty except what is apparent of it"
"to extend their headcoverings to cover their bosoms"
"not to display their beauty except to their husbands or their fathers..."
"not to strike their feet (on the ground) so as to make known what they hide"
"to draw their outergarments close around themselves"
It can be seen that three of these commandments relate to behavior. These are:

lowering the gaze
guarding the private parts
not striking the feet on the ground so as to give knowledge of what is hidden
Lowering the gaze means not looking at what is forbidden to be seen of others. Guarding the private parts means that only the husband is allowed to see or touch them. Not giving knowledge of what is hidden means not posturing or strutting around so as to jangle hidden jewelry or make men think about hidden body parts. All of these are part of what Allah SWT has commanded in regard to hijab.

The other four commandments relate to dress, and can really be expressed as three rules:

not displaying the beauty beyond "what is apparent of it" except to the people listed in 24:31
extending the headcovering to cover the bosom
drawing the outergarment close around
What exactly is the meaning of each of these rules? For this, we need to look to the Sunna, because the Sunna shows us how the Prophet (sAas) explained the Quran.

The Prophet (sAas) explained to Asma bint Abu Bakr (rAa) that the phrase "what is apparent of it" refers to the face and hands. This is narrated by Aisha Umm al-Muminin (rAa), Qatada (rAa), and Asma bint Umais (rAa). This has been confirmed as the explanation of the phrase by the following scholars:

Sahaba: Aisha Umm al-Muminin (rAa), ibn Abbas (rAa), Anas ibn Malik (rAa), and Miswar ibn Makhrama (rAa)

Tabi'un: Ata (rAa), Qatada (rAa), Sa'id ibn Jubayr (rAa), Mujahid (rAa), al-Hasan (rAa), and al-Dahhak (rAa)

Commentators on the Quran: Imam Tabari, Imam Zamakhshari, Imam Razi, and Imam Qurtubi

In fact, the majority of scholars have agreed that the phrase "what is apparent of it" refers to the face and hands. For further information, please see Opinions of Scholars in Favor of Displaying the Face and Hands.

Therefore, the first rule can really be phrased as "do not display the beauty except for the face and hands around non-mahram men". This is the basic rule of hijab. You must recognize it. This is where it comes from. It is nothing other than the Prophet's (sAas) explanation of the Quran.

The second rule is to extend the headcovering (khimar) to cover the bosom. The commentators on the Quran have explained exactly what this command entails:

Imam Abu Abdullah Qurtubi: "Women in those days used to cover their heads with the khimar, throwing its ends upon their backs. This left the neck and the upper part of the chest bare, along with the ears, in the manner of the Christians. Then Allah commanded them to cover those parts with the khimar."

Imam Abu'l-Fida ibn Kathir: "'Extend their khimars to cover their bosoms' means that they should wear the khimar in such a way that they cover their chests so that they will be different from the women of the jahiliyyah who did not do that but would pass in front of men with their chests uncovered and with their necks, forelocks, and earrings uncovered."

From this we can see that the jahili women wore their khimars kaffiyah-style, with the ends tossed over their backs. This covered most of the hair, but left the forelock (front of the hair), the ears, the neck, and the upper chest uncovered. Then when the commandment, "Extend their khimars to cover their bosoms," was revealed, the women secured their khimars around the circles of their faces, fastened them at the chin, and let the ends drape down toward their bosoms. This would cover the forelock, the ears, the neck, and the upper chest, just as Imam Qurtubi and Imam ibn Kathir have indicated. And the end result is clearly a headscarf.

So what we have is that all of the body except the face and hands is commanded to be covered around non-mahram men (by the clause "not to display their beauty except what is apparent of it"), and the covering of the hair, ears, neck, and upper chest is specifically to be accomplished by the khimar (headscarf).

These are the two rules indicated by Surah an-Nur ayah 31, and once we understand how the Prophet (sAas) explained the meaning of the ayah, we can see that it clearly and explicitly sets out the dress of the Muslim sister around non-mahram men: a headscarf and conservative clothing that together cover everything but the face and the hands.

There is also the commandment in Surah al-Ahzab ayah 59 to wear a jilbab (outergarment). According to the majority of the scholars, this commandment applies when a sister is outdoors or in open public places (like the market or the masjid). The jilbab is thus the modest Islamic coat that goes over our modest Islamic clothes whenever we would wear a coat.

To learn more about the jilbab, please read my article Evidences for Jilbab. This sets out dalils from the Quran and Sunna, and the opinions of the scholars regarding the jilbab. To summarize the information in that document, the jilbab is any garment that meets the following conditions:

it is an outergarment, an extra layer, something worn over the clothes
it is thick and opaque and loosely cut so that it conceals what is underneath it
if it is worn with a khimar and with socks and shoes, it should cover from the shoulders to the ankles; if it is worn without these, it must cover everything but the face and hands, like a cloak
Again, the jilbab is to be worn outdoors and in open public places. The purpose of wearing the jilbab is to assert our Islamic identity and to provide protection from harassment for us. It is part of our hijab for these locations.

Summary
According to the Quran and Sunna, hijab consists of modest behavior in lowering the gaze, guarding the private parts, and avoiding showing off, and of modest dress. The modest dress includes a headscarf and must cover all of the body except the face and the hands. Outdoors and in open public places, a long coat (jilbab) should be worn in addition to the modest dress commanded by Surah an-Nur ayah 31. Each of these obligations is clearly set out in the Quran and has been explained by the Prophet (sAas).



My challenge to you

To me, the obligations of hijab are clear, explicit, and detailed when I look at both the Quran and the Sunna. There is no question in my mind; I am convinced that Allah SWT has indeed commanded hijab. Inshallah, I hope that after you have studied the dalils I have presented, you agree with me on this. Frankly, I don't see any other interpretation.

If we are agreed that the Quran and the Sunna do command hijab, then the real question is: how important is it to you to follow what Allah SWT has commanded in the Quran and Sunna?

It's your choice. Is it important for you to obey Allah SWT? Do you think you should submit your will to His? Do you believe that He knows what is best for you? Do you think that if you dislike what He has commanded, you should be the one to change, not Him? Are you willing to set aside your dislike and to try to seek the wisdom in what He has commanded? Are you motivated to try to surrender to Him even though it may be difficult for you? Is the promise of Jannah worth going through some hardship now?

Please consider each of these questions. If you are sincere in your commitment to Allah SWT, and in your choice of Islam as a religion, don't you think you should give hijab a try?

SisterKhadija
:sister:

[*Hana*]

:sl:

MASHALLAH SISTER!!!!! :happy:

Jazak allah khair! That was an excellent response.

Wasalam
Hana

[Sister Khadija]

MASHALLAH SISTER!!!!! :happy:

Jazak allah khair! That was an excellent response.

Wasalam
Hana

:w: Sister Hana

ALHAMDULLIAH WE ARE ON THE RIGHT PATH!!! :sister: :loving: :coolsis: :sl:

Salaam,
Sister Khadija

[*Hana*]

Alhamdulillah, sister. :loving:

[Turin Turambar]

To all the women in this thread, with all my respect,

"On March 11, 2002, fourteen Saudi Arabian girls burned to death inside a public intermediate school in Mecca. Efforts to rescue several of these girls were thwarted by local members of the Committee to Preserve Virtue and Prevent Vice. Witnesses reported that any girls who were not wearing abayas, the traditional head-to-toe coverings, were pushed back into the burning dormitory."

Please check in http://lantos.house.gov/HoR/CA12/Hum...UDI+ARABIA.htm

Right now, living in open societies, your are free to choose whether to wear islamic dress or not. That is not necessarily the case in places in which Muslims are already a majority. Be careful.

The ulema who interpret the Quranic teachings are always men.

[cool_jannah]

oh please...
we dont trust the kuffar nor do we trust their media. please dont try to put yourself in a difficult position on the day of reckoning! dont cheat yourself!
die in the state of true belief...in the state of Islam.
I dont agree with ure explanations and arguments against how Islam treats women...I feel sorry they way you think because majority of true muslim women are the happiest souls on earth. they are protected in the society, in their family..and their afterlife...
its really regretful...how unfotunate is the one who not only talks lies about Islam, but propogates falsehood about this beautiful deen.

btw we are going off topic..lets discuss if Jesus(pbuh) was crucified or not...
I dont think he was..if you have problems with that feel free to reply back
salaam

[cool_jannah]

Say: 'O People of the Book, come to common terms as between us and you: that we worship none but Allah; that we associate not aught with Him; and do not some of us take others as Lords, apart from Allah. And if they turn their backs, say: 'Bear witness that we are Muslims’. (3:64)

[*Hana*]

To all the women in this thread, with all my respect,

"On March 11, 2002, fourteen Saudi Arabian girls burned to death inside a public intermediate school in Mecca. Efforts to rescue several of these girls were thwarted by local members of the Committee to Preserve Virtue and Prevent Vice. Witnesses reported that any girls who were not wearing abayas, the traditional head-to-toe coverings, were pushed back into the burning dormitory."

Please check in http://lantos.house.gov/HoR/CA12/Hum...UDI+ARABIA.htm

Right now, living in open societies, your are free to choose whether to wear islamic dress or not. That is not necessarily the case in places in which Muslims are already a majority. Be careful.

The ulema who interpret the Quranic teachings are always men.

Actually, yes, this is off topic and Turin has already received an answer to this subject in one of my other posts on page 4 of this thread and I do believe a few others have answered him as well.

Wasalam
Hana

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

The ulema who interpret the Quranic teachings are always men.

Except for the thousands (literally!) of Muslim women who have been Islamic scholars listed in this book! Some prominent female scholars have also been mentioned here:
http://islamtoday.com/show_detail_se...&main_cat_id=2
Muslim women have traditionally been scholars, starting right from A'isha rd, the Prophet's wife.

[Turin Turambar]

To everybody,

I am sorry. You are right. The subject of Islamic dress was off topic. But it wasn't solely my fault. Look at Sister Khadija's long post on the subject. It was such a temptation to me that I forgot that here we are debating something else and I answered it.

We share the guilt I guess.

As an appropriate penance I will wear a burqa for one hour...;)

[*Hana*]

As an appropriate penance I will wear a burqa for one hour...

What you consider a punishment, some of us consider an honour and act of worship.

Hana

[Sister Khadija]

To everybody,

I am sorry. You are right. The subject of Islamic dress was off topic. But it wasn't solely my fault. Look at Sister Khadija's long post on the subject. It was such a temptation to me that I forgot that here we are debating something else and I answered it.

We share the guilt I guess.

As an appropriate penance I will wear a burqa for one hour...;)

Assalaam Alakium,

In Islam we do not put blame on other people and point fingers. I was simply answering a question for another Sister. I appreciate the compliments on my post, but it was not ment to be replied too as a discussion. It was a thougrough answer to one question and I left it at that.

If anyone wanted to discuss it further, let us do what GOD tells us to do in this situation. THINK! What would GOD want us to do?

One of us, myself included, should have suggested pasting it into a new thread for further discussion.

Would we like to start a new thred on this? :sister: :? :happy:

I suggest we go back to the original question from the first post.

Basically the question is what is the islamic viewpoint on the events taking place after the alleged crucifiction, do we believe its just a fabrictaed story?

Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him) was followed by a few disciples who were inspired by God to support him. Not only that, but the non-believers plotted to kill Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him), but God had a better plan for him and his followers as the Noble Qur'an tells us in the following verses (Which is translated as follows):“ Then when 'Iesa (Jesus) came to know of their disbelief, he said: Who will be my helpers in Allah's Cause? Al-Hawariun (the disciples) said: We are the helpers of Allah; we believe in Allah, and bear witness that we are Muslims (i.e. we submit to Allah). Our Lord! We believed in what You have sent down, and we follow the Messenger ['Iesa (Jesus)]; so write us down among those who bear witness (to the truth i.e. La Ilaha Ill-Allah -- none has the right to be worshipped but Allah). And they (disbelievers) plotted [to kill 'Iesa (Jesus)], and Allah planned too. And Allah is the best of the planners. And (remember) when Allah said: O 'Iesa (Jesus)! I will take you and raise you to Myself and clear you [of the forged statement that 'Iesa (Jesus) is Allah's son] of those who disbelieve, and I will make those who follow you (Monotheist, who worship none but Allah) superior to those who disbelieve [in the Oneness of Allah, or disbelieve in some of His Messengers, e.g. Mohammed, 'Iesa (Jesus), Musa (Moses), etc. (Peace Be Upon Him), or in His Holy Books, e.g. the Taurat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel), The Qur'an] till the Day of Resurrection. Then you will return to Me and I will judge between you in the matters in which you used to dispute. As to those who disbelieve, I will punish them with a severe torment in this world and in the Hereafter, and they will have no helpers” [Chapter 3: verses 52-56].

As the above verses indicate Jesus was raised to heaven before he died. This means that according to the Noble Qur'an he was not crucified. It was the plan of the enemies of Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him) to put him to death on the cross, but God saved him and somebody else was crucified. This plot and the false accusation about Mary are considered by the Noble Qur'an to be some of the sins of the non-believing Jews. All of this is made clear in the following verses (Which is translated as follows):“ And because of their (Jews) disbelief and uttering against Maryam (Mary) a grave false charge (that she has committed illegal sexual intercourse). And because of their saying (in boast). We killed Messiah 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah, -- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of 'Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam [Mary]. But Allah raised him ['Iesa (Jesus)] up (with his body and soul) unto Himself (and he (Peace Be Upon Him) is in the heaven). And Allah is ever All-Powerful, All-Wise. And there is none of the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allah and a human being], before his ['Iesa (Jesus) or a Jews or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death). And on the Day of Resurrection, he ['Iesa (Jesus)] will be a witness against them” [Chapter 4: verses 156-159].

As muslims obviously we believe this, but to a christian he would say there were all these witnesses that saw him after the crucifiction, were all of them lieing?

No, when you lie it is because you know the truth. The Apostles did NOT know the truth, only what they saw. Jesus (Peace be upon him) was alone in the Garden for, they say 30 minutes, before he was arrested. What ever happend in those moments were solely between God and Jesus. Anything between the two of them is possible. We are talking about GOD! He took Jesus, made the switch, end of story.

What the Apostles wrote is only what they saw and many things of GOD are beyond human comprehension. Who are we to deny that God would have done this? The reason he did is the question.

It was to test all of human kind. The reason we are here to be tested. So when we come to judgement day we are tested based on what knowledge did we have and what did we do with it? Make the right or wrong choices?

:sister: Sister Khadija

[*Hana*]

:sl:

Awww sis, no one is blaming you for answering the sisters question. :)

But, Mr. Turin, likes to avoid the topic at hand sometimes and use another's post to do that. ;) I just wanted to re-direct his attention to where me, you and others already covered what he was trying to bring up again and to keep him on topic.

It was a wonderful post sis and you answered her question beautifully, mashallah. :D (Now if we could just get Turin to read it. :p)

Wasalam
Hana

[Turin Turambar]

To everybody,

My last post for today! I know that you will not miss me...;)

Hana_Aku, why do you think I wouldn't read the posts? That would make no sense, I would be debating with myself! There is no fun in that! I read the last post here, the one that says:

"The Apostles did NOT know the truth, only what they saw. Jesus (Peace be upon him) was alone in the Garden for, they say 30 minutes, before he was arrested. What ever happend in those moments were solely between God and Jesus. Anything between the two of them is possible. We are talking about GOD! He took Jesus, made the switch, end of story."

So according to the Muslim view God deliberately FOOLED the Apostles into believing that the real Jesus was arrested.

What a God you believe in!

So the one answering the questions of the Roman magistrate was "fake-Jesus" and the one who spoke from the Cross was also "fake-Jesus". All the time his followers (including his own mother, covered in tears) were being FOOLED by God.

I will have to take a rest.

But as Arnold says, I will be back...;)

[*Hana*]

Hana_Aku, why do you think I wouldn't read the posts? That would make no sense, I would be debating with myself!

I say it because both I and Sister Khadija responded in full to that subject and had you read what was posted, you wouldn't have responded with what you said about those Saudi Women. That has nothing to do with the teachings of Islam. Period!

Sooooooo, anyway....back to topic. Let me ask you this: If Jesus, pbuh, died on the cross, who was the man that confronted the disciples later claiming to be Jesus, pbuh?

Ohhh, and of course we'd miss you....like a bad case of the flu. :p :giggling: Just kidding. lol Actually, I for one, look forward to continuing dialogue. So, see ya later. :D

Peace
Hana

[Sister Khadija]

To everybody,

My last post for today! I know that you will not miss me...;)

Hana_Aku, why do you think I wouldn't read the posts? That would make no sense, I would be debating with myself! There is no fun in that! I read the last post here, the one that says:

"The Apostles did NOT know the truth, only what they saw. Jesus (Peace be upon him) was alone in the Garden for, they say 30 minutes, before he was arrested. What ever happend in those moments were solely between God and Jesus. Anything between the two of them is possible. We are talking about GOD! He took Jesus, made the switch, end of story."

So according to the Muslim view God deliberately FOOLED the Apostles into believing that the real Jesus was arrested.

What a God you believe in!

So the one answering the questions of the Roman magistrate was "fake-Jesus" and the one who spoke from the Cross was also "fake-Jesus". All the time his followers (including his own mother, covered in tears) were being FOOLED by God.

I will have to take a rest.

But as Arnold says, I will be back...;)

Your fun and respectful to debate with, thanks! :happy: :)

The in the Garden switch is only a possibilty. It could have happend at anytime. The point is, the Bible went through such a cut and paste job when it was finally made into a book, how do we know the Disciples actually did not say in their writings, and it appeared they crucified him instead of and they crucified him.

Mary and the Disciples could have been the only ones to know, could have written about it, and could have had their words changed when the bible was finally created by Constantine 200 years after Jesus was gone. They were all astray already before they even wrote the bible.

Salaam,
Sister Kahdija

[Mohsin]

No, when you lie it is because you know the truth. The Apostles did NOT know the truth, only what they saw. Jesus (Peace be upon him) was alone in the Garden for, they say 30 minutes, before he was arrested. What ever happend in those moments were solely between God and Jesus. Anything between the two of them is possible. We are talking about GOD! He took Jesus, made the switch, end of story.

What the Apostles wrote is only what they saw and many things of GOD are beyond human comprehension. Who are we to deny that God would have done this? The reason he did is the question.

It was to test all of human kind. The reason we are here to be tested. So when we come to judgement day we are tested based on what knowledge did we have and what did we do with it? Make the right or wrong choices?

:sister: Sister Khadija

No you don't understand what i am talking about. AFTER the alledged crucifixion, Jesus is said to have spoken to his disciples in the Bible. So my question is when was he raised up, if it was immediately in the garden, then who is the person that is talking to the disciples in the Bible, what i mean is, what is the muslim perspective of this. Do we believe it's just another fabricated story, and that it did not actually happen? Or have we got another possible answer for it

[Turin Turambar]

Sister Khadija,

Thanks for that comment! I really appreciate it. I feel that we are almost friends by now....

But that doesn't mean that I am not looking for arguments against what you say. I will keep posting for everybody to have fun bashing me....;)