He has also given man the know-how to create nuclear bombs (obviously not in revelation but via inspiration, as nothing happens without the will of Allah). A device that has the potential to destroy much of the planet and humanity. One could argue the same as you did for this example too. I.e Why would an Omniscient being allow something so damaging to come into existence that people could use in the wrong way.
I actually would make such an argument, yes, although I think it makes a difference if there is a passage in scripture that explicitly instructs such a thing. As far as I know, there is no instruction in the Qur'an or ahadith on making nuclear weapons, so while an analogy could be made I don't think they are directly comparable.
I understand your point about the test - I've heard it mentioned before. Those of us who don't believe in an afterlife would feel safer if something could be done here and now to prevent corrupt organisations from carrying out brutal executions, rather than waiting for punishment later. However, I also understand that Islam wasn't exactly designed with non-believers' views in mind.
So on the one hand we have a punishment that seems almost impossible to apply correctly, given the slim chance of having four witnesses, and which acts as a deterrent for an action that is unlikely to happen anyway (i.e. public adultery), but which on the other hand makes it possible for corrupt authorities to carry out brutal executions under the pretense that they are doing the will of Allah. How could an omniscient being come up with such a damaging and impractical idea?
Peace
Places like Iran, Somalia etc will always have these executions, they just happen to have an excuse(complex ruling in Islam).
Even if Islam was not to have this ruling, they would have brutal executions based on culture rather than religion. Islam clearly state killing innocent people is wrong. But yet some Muslims still kill innocent people.
Some people in Somalia kill each other because of their tribes. Where in Islam does it say it okay to do that?
But yet this is still practice? So culture is far more important to them than religion.
There are places in this world were brutal practices still takes place based on culture. This is not exclusive to Muslim countries.
Last edited by Rhubarb Tart; 09-06-2010 at 01:55 PM.
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one.." [Bukhaari].
I understand your point about the test - I've heard it mentioned before. Those of us who don't believe in an afterlife would feel safer if something could be done here and now to prevent corrupt organisations from carrying out brutal executions, rather than waiting for punishment later. However, I also understand that Islam wasn't exactly designed with non-believers' views in mind.
You seem to be suggesting that corruption unique to muslims and that the system of stoning itself will attract evil people.
I see that as flawed. An evil person would be evil regardless.
A corrupt teacher in a catholic school could beat up a kid just as easily as a mosque teacher could beat on in a madrassah.
How can one say that sexual immorality has been "eradicated" when it is still perfectly possible for people to sin in private without fear of prosecution?
Peace
seems a little dishonest to address Ansar in a post, when you know he isn't here to reply to you?
Also I doubt you have read his post in totality and exercised an abstract thought? or is it that you were banking that you'd get away with dishonesty? He wrote
format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-Adl
It is worth noting that in the 1400 years of Islamic history, these stringent conditions have never been met even once
in other words to accuse someone of adultery the punishment would be stringent and not worth taking a risk for unless met with other witnesses who can corroborate that account, and to be the subject of stoning one would have to sin publicly in open view of bystanders.
really easy and I know English is your forte as you so like to point out in every post related or unrelated to education issues!
all the best
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
So adultery will still be going on, just in private.
I hope this answer's your query:
(24:19) Indeed, those who like that immorality should be spread [or publicized] among those who have believed will have a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And Allah knows and you do not know.
seems a little dishonest to address Ansar in a post, when you know he isn't here to reply to you?
I know he's not here any longer - a real loss to the forum. Still, at least it's possible to have an intelligent conversation with some of the members here. Ansar's post seemed like the most definitive explanation in the thread, so I thought others wouldn't mind a discussion in relation to it.
Also I doubt you have read his post in totality and exercised an abstract thought? or is it that you were banking that you'd get away with dishonesty? He wrote
in other words to accuse someone of adultery the punishment would be stringent and not worth taking a risk for unless met with other witnesses who can corroborate that account, and to be the subject of stoning one would have to sin publicly in open view of bystanders.
really easy and I know English is your forte as you so like to point out in every post related or unrelated to education issues!
Yes, I did read all of it, and yes, I was aware of all that you've said. Thanks anyway.
(24:19) Indeed, those who like that immorality should be spread [or publicized] among those who have believed will have a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And Allah knows and you do not know.
That's interesting. So do you believe that even if there is no obvious and public punishment for those who commit adultery in private, that Allah will find some other way to punish them in this life and in the next? Or is this verse only about people who spread knowledge of private sin?
The quote from Ansar Al-'Adl also mentions, (emphasis his own):
The punishments for fornication and adultery are designed more to protect society from the open practice of licentious sexual behavior than they are designed to punish people.
I think this answers your previous query about the punishment. And Allaah (swt) knows best.
I know he's not here any longer - a real loss to the forum. Still, at least it's possible to have an intelligent conversation with some of the members here. Ansar's post seemed like the most definitive explanation in the thread, so I thought others wouldn't mind a discussion in relation to it.
No one minds a discussion, one minds your own rendition and misconstrual of what he'd written!
Yes, I did read all of it, and yes, I was aware of all that you've said. Thanks anyway.
Peace
Then why did you interpret so far astray from what has been written?
all the best
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
That's interesting. So do you believe that even if there is no obvious and public punishment for those who commit adultery in private, that Allah will find some other way to punish them in this life and in the next? Or is this verse only about people who spread knowledge of private sin?
Peace
Its about publicising private sins, further details are provided in ahadeeth.
Its about publicising private sins, further details are provided in ahadeeth.
Hello, thank you for explaining this.
But what gives someone who has sinned many times themselves a right to condemn others? Can't they just go to jail or be allowed to atone for their sins while alive?
But what gives someone who has sinned many times themselves a right to condemn others? Can't they just go to jail or be allowed to atone for their sins while alive?
whos going to decide if they go to jail or atone for there sins??
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
whos going to decide if they go to jail or atone for there sins??
Assuming that we are speaking of countries where adultery is illegal, then the authorities. This would be a deterrent. However, would stoning really be atonement if the adulterer didn't want it? They would need to be repentant for offending God.
Assuming that we are speaking of countries where adultery is illegal, then the authorities. This would be a deterrent. However, would stoning really be atonement if the adulterer didn't want it? They would need to be repentant for offending God.
If an adulterer didnt care and thought what he did was right then God will Judge him in the hereafter.
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
Assuming that we are speaking of countries where adultery is illegal, then the authorities. This would be a deterrent. However, would stoning really be atonement if the adulterer didn't want it? They would need to be repentant for offending God.
In Sharia law there are different levels of crimes and punishments. For a Hadd crime there are prescribed punishments. The judge has no say about the punishment once the person meets the criteria of being found guilty or confesses to a Hadd crime. Adultery is a Hadd crime, the punishment is death by stoning and this can not be changed or rescinded. While there have been some case of people being stoned for adultery, there has never been a legal stoning for adultery. The criteria for guilt has never been met after the time of the Prophet(PBUH). Any stoning done in the past 1400 years or so was not legal and not in accordance with shariah law. .
Vigilante law and "Government" Law are not shariah and those who mete out invalid punishments in the name of Shariah, need to be stopped and face punishment for their wrong doings..
peace glo,
you said that you don't know any countries where stoning is practiced, i have come across over a few thousand,
the main one being usa, and secondly i think britain, they are usually carried out by individuals who sign up for these jobs and illegally (according to the un) travel to other countries, some of it is practised by police against their own citizens, in the majority of cases the people being stoned are innocent of any crime and are totally righteous people who often speak out against corruption and wrongdoing.
these particular stones are made of lead, they are ejected from long automatic weapons, and gunpowder is used to shoot them out at high velocity,
some of the weapons are concealable, but the user is saved from having to swing their arm.
it is amazing how use of names and wordplay can often obscure what is clear and obvious, and puts a totally different light on practically the same thing - other than the fact that this practice is usually against innocent men, women and children in illegally occupied countries and sometimes against citizen protesters in the countries which they claim to serve (the stones in these cases are sometimes made of hard rubber and leave bruises and broken ribs etc, but in the majority of cases are made of lead some of which have hollow points which cause more internal damage - often ripping out a fistful of flesh or vital organs through the other side).
it is also interesting to note how the supporters of these illegal wars and tyranny often use the term stoning as propaganda against other countries whose people they would like to shoot with lead stones from high velocity pipes.
but when these issues are compared side by side - it looks more obvious that they are trying to protect immorality and degenerate decadence (which they would most likely have their own son/daughter in laws killed for if they found their sons/daughters were being betrayed - google princess diana) among the general populace by making the offenders out to be victims of injustice.
it is also interesting that shameful immorality and unfaithfulness is something the scriptures tell us the evil satan (diabolis/iblis) wants to push on the children of adam to bring about their demoralization and destruction.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Array
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks