|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:06 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:13 am
 |
|
|
|
|
ca adam Khalid, what are your thoughts, and even your personal stance, in regards to Sharia Law? How does it affect you now, your family and friends, and what do you think of the way it affects Muslims (and non-Muslims) in countries that are bound by Sharia Law? One more question, and this one is specific: if a Muslim man were to marry a newly converted Muslim woman—let's say an American woman—and then decides he wants to move into a country that follows Sharia Law, what would be the result if the Muslim woman didn't want to go? As well, what would be the result of anyone who decides to apostatize from Islam, specifically here in te US? How does the Islamic community respond? And how would a community under Sharia Law respond? Thank you.
All Muslims must follow Sharia Law
It is the Law that God Almighty gave to us and wants us to follow
If a Muslim man went to a Country where Sharia Law is Practiced then the Muslim woman should also go
If a Person Leaves Islam, then God will punish them on Judgment Day
"Quite a number of the People of the Book wish they could Turn you (people) back to infidelity after ye have believed, from selfish envy, after the Truth hath become Manifest unto them: But forgive and overlook, Till God accomplish His purpose; for God Hath power over all things. (The Noble Quran, 2:109) |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:28 pm
|
|
|
 |
Sorry for the late reply.
First, it doesn't do your argument much credit to continue siting conspiracy theorists for your information. It misleads you. Once again, you are guilty of conjecture. Second, let's not throw links back and forth; it is best to articulate our points, because no two people are completely alike. Therefore, I cannot assume that you believe absolutely everything you site in your links. So, I'm not getting to understand the real you. Just whoever wrote the content of the links you site.
Khalid Ibn Walid Yes they did The Gospel of Judas is an example and The Gospel of Mary Magdalene I can name a dozen more
You are referring to the gnostic gospels and the pseudepigrapha, which have never been considered a part of the Christian canon, except by heretics or those seeking to discredit the Apostles (Shelley, 66).They are nothing more than malicious "fan fictions," if you understand what I mean. And as Rednal stated, these were never accepted as part of the Canon by Christians; they were only accepted by the gnostics (who were not a part of the Church) and heretics.
Although the Thirty-Ninth Paschal Letter of Athanasius of AD 367 is the earliest known record containing the exact of the 27 books of the New Testament portion of the Canon, the authenticity and canonization of such books had been established from their initial penning (Grudem, 61). Collections of the canon comensed as early as AD 100, sometime after all New Testament books had been written (Shelley, 66.). There is even evidence to suggest canonical collections were fairly commonplace in churches by AD 200 (Ibid.). All of the New Testament books can be verifiably proven to have been written within the same generation as those who knew Jesus face-to-face, and such books would have been dismissed if they had been false, as was the case with the absurd "Gospel of Thomas" (Grudem, 62, 65.).
The collection of the Canon was not an act of Christians determining what was to be held as truth, but a recognition of what was already authority in the Church from the beginning (Shelley, 66.).
(Shelley, Bruce L. CHURCH HISTORY IN PLAIN LANGUAGE. Nashville, TN: NELSON, 1995.)
(Grudem, Wayne. SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION TO BIBLICAL DOCTRINE. Grand Rapids, MI: ZONDERVAN, 2000.)
(you may note that I have sited both Christian and non-Christian literature here…)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:46 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:34 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:55 pm
|
|
|
|
|
ca adam Khalid Ibn Walid All Muslims must follow Sharia Law It is the Law that God Almighty gave to us and wants us to follow If a Muslim man went to a Country where Sharia Law is Practiced then the Muslim woman should also go If a Person Leaves Islam, then God will punish them on Judgment Day "Quite a number of the People of the Book wish they could Turn you (people) back to infidelity after ye have believed, from selfish envy, after the Truth hath become Manifest unto them: But forgive and overlook, Till God accomplish His purpose; for God Hath power over all things. (The Noble Quran, 2:109)I understand, but you didn't answer my questions (except for the first one). I'll ask them in this manner: 2. How does it affect you now, your family and friends? 3. What do you think of the way it affects Muslims (and non-Muslims) in countries that are bound by Sharia Law? 4. If a Muslim man were to marry a newly converted Muslim woman—let's say an American woman—and then decides he wants to move into a country that follows Sharia Law, what would be the result if the Muslim woman didn't want to go? 5. What would be the result of anyone who decides to apostatize from Islam, specifically here in te US? How does the Islamic community respond?6. And how would a community under Sharia Law respond?
I have answered all the Questions but ,you don't seem to understand Sharia Law
We Muslims DON'T seperate Religion and State
Shariah is the body of Islamic Law. In an Islamic state, the sovereignty belongs to Almighty God. Therefore, it is necessary that his (God’s law should be established on earth, not the man-made laws.
In other words, establishment of Shariah means establishment of God’s law on earth.
Islam today is the only religion that has the laws that can be implemented in the country. No other religion has them. Islam as I explained above means to submitting your will to God. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:58 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 1:20 pm
|
|
|
|
ca adam Khalid Ibn Walid I have answered all the Questions but ,you don't seem to understand Sharia Law We Muslims DON'T seperate Religion and State Shariah is the body of Islamic Law. In an Islamic state, the sovereignty belongs to Almighty God. Therefore, it is necessary that his (God’s law should be established on earth, not the man-made laws.
In other words, establishment of Shariah means establishment of God’s law on earth. Islam today is the only religion that has the laws that can be implemented in the country. No other religion has them. Islam as I explained above means to submitting your will to God. You didn't answer them, but I'll digress on that. I'm perfectly aware of the fact that Islam and its constitution aren't separated. At the same time, I've been to a Muslim community center in the past, and it was explained to me that because the US already has a constitution, there was no need to have Islamic constitution. What does this mean to you?
Well I live in the United States and I follow My Religion, which means I follow the Sharia Law, and the US constitution. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 1:26 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 6:26 pm
|
|
|
|
I dunno, the Eastern Orthodox might disagree with that, if only because of the name... rofl
Seriously, though, there is an orthodox belief in Christianity, even if it's surrounded by a lot of opinions on things. Opinions that... well, to be honest, don't really matter. Like whether you call your spiritual leader "Priest", "Pastor", "Minister", or something else altogether. In brief, though, beliefs that aren't representative of cults are more-or-less orthodox for Christians; for example, the Mormons (and, in fact, the Muslims) both claim to worship the same God as Christians do, but your average Roman Catholic would probably vehemently deny that either group is Christian. We have lots of debates on the little details, but the big ones are more-or-less a requirement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:42 am
|
|
|
|
Khalid Ibn Walid ca adam Khalid, what are your thoughts, and even your personal stance, in regards to Sharia Law? How does it affect you now, your family and friends, and what do you think of the way it affects Muslims (and non-Muslims) in countries that are bound by Sharia Law? One more question, and this one is specific: if a Muslim man were to marry a newly converted Muslim woman—let's say an American woman—and then decides he wants to move into a country that follows Sharia Law, what would be the result if the Muslim woman didn't want to go? As well, what would be the result of anyone who decides to apostatize from Islam, specifically here in te US? How does the Islamic community respond? And how would a community under Sharia Law respond? Thank you. All Muslims must follow Sharia Law It is the Law that God Almighty gave to us and wants us to follow If a Muslim man went to a Country where Sharia Law is Practiced then the Muslim woman should also go If a Person Leaves Islam, then God will punish them on Judgment Day "Quite a number of the People of the Book wish they could Turn you (people) back to infidelity after ye have believed, from selfish envy, after the Truth hath become Manifest unto them: But forgive and overlook, Till God accomplish His purpose; for God Hath power over all things. (The Noble Quran, 2:109)
Okay, let me get this straight. How does Islam support the caliphate. (A Muslim type government.) Sharia Law(s) AND the US constitution(US standing on freedom of Religion(s) I see many inherent contradictions with the stance. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:46 am
|
|
|
|
Khalid Ibn Walid ca adam Khalid Ibn Walid I have answered all the Questions but ,you don't seem to understand Sharia Law We Muslims DON'T seperate Religion and State Shariah is the body of Islamic Law. In an Islamic state, the sovereignty belongs to Almighty God. Therefore, it is necessary that his (God’s law should be established on earth, not the man-made laws.
In other words, establishment of Shariah means establishment of God’s law on earth. Islam today is the only religion that has the laws that can be implemented in the country. No other religion has them. Islam as I explained above means to submitting your will to God. You didn't answer them, but I'll digress on that. I'm perfectly aware of the fact that Islam and its constitution aren't separated. At the same time, I've been to a Muslim community center in the past, and it was explained to me that because the US already has a constitution, there was no need to have Islamic constitution. What does this mean to you? Well I live in the United States and I follow My Religion, which means I follow the Sharia Law, and the US constitution.
Lets take a look at some aspects of Sharia Law and where it may or may not conflict with the U.S. Constitution. (For disclosure I am not a lawyer nor a legal expert in Sharia or U.S. Law.)
First, what is Sharia?
Wikipedia states Sharia refers to the sacred law of Islam. All Muslims believe Sharia is God’s law, but they have differences between themselves as to exactly what it entails. Which will be difficult to discern what to apply when, but we’ll labor along for the sake of discussion.
In Western countries, where Muslim immigration is more recent, Muslim minorities have introduced Sharia family law, for use in their own disputes. Attempts to impose Sharia have been accompanied by controversy, violence, and even warfare (Second Sudanese Civil War).
The following is a truncated version with a couple of modifications (eliminating repetitious ibids and links) of multiple Wikipedia entries:
Legal and Court Proceedings:
Wikipedia states that Sharia judicial proceedings have significant differences with other legal traditions, including those in both common law and civil law.
1. Sharia courts do not generally employ lawyers; plaintiffs and defendants represent themselves.
2. Trials are conducted solely by the judge, and there is no jury system.
3. There is no pre-trial discovery process, no cross-examination of witnesses, and no penalty of perjury (on the assumption that no witness would thus endanger his soul) Unlike common law, judges’ verdicts do not set binding precedents under the principle of stare decisis and unlike civil law, Sharia does not utilize formally codified statutes (these were first introduced only in the late 19th century during the decline of the Ottoman Empire, cf. mecelle).
4. Instead of precedents and codes, Sharia relies on medieval jurist’s manuals and collections of non-binding legal opinions, or fatwas, issued by religious scholars (ulama, particularly a mufti); these can be made binding for a particular case at the discretion of a judge.
5. Sharia courts’ rules of evidence also maintain a distinctive custom of prioritizing oral testimony and excluding written and documentary evidence (including forensic and circumstantial evidence), on the basis that it could be tampered with or forged.
6. A confession, an oath, or the oral testimony of a witness are the only evidence admissible in a Sharia court, written evidence is only admissible with the attestations of multiple, witnesses deemed reliable by the judge, i.e. notaries.
7. Testimony must be from at least two witnesses, and preferably free Muslim male witnesses, who are not related parties and who are of sound mind and reliable character; testimony to establish the crime of adultery, or zina must be from four direct witnesses.
8. Forensic evidence (i.e. fingerprints, ballistics, blood samples, DNA etc.) and other circumstantial evidence is likewise rejected in hudud cases in favor of eyewitnesses, a practice which can cause severe difficulties for women plaintiffs in rape cases.
9. Testimony from women is given only half the weight of men [in most sources outside of Wikipedia Sharia states that a woman's testimony only carries the weight of 1/4th of a man's], and testimony from non-Muslims may be excluded altogether (if against a Muslim).
10. In lieu of written evidence, oaths are accorded much greater weight; rather than being used simply to guarantee the truth of ensuing testimony, they are themselves used as evidence.
11. Plaintiffs lacking other evidence to support their claims may demand that defendants take an oath swearing their innocence, refusal thereof can result in a verdict for the plaintiff.
12. Sharia courts, with their tradition of pro se representation, simple rules of evidence, and absence of appeals courts, prosecutors, cross examination, complex documentary evidence and discovery proceedings, juries and voir dire proceedings, circumstantial evidence, forensics, case law, standardized codes, exclusionary rules, and most of the other infrastructure of civil and common law court systems, have as a result, comparatively informal and streamlined proceedings. [that's one way of putting it]
13. This can provide significant increases in speed and efficiency (at the cost of the safeguards provided in secular legal systems), and can be an advantage in jurisdictions where the general court system is slow or corrupt, and where few litigants can afford lawyers. (end Wikipedia)
This is not a concise review of the difference nor similarities between U.S. Law and Sharia. It is only meant to educate us on what Sharia law is in comparison to our legal system. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:05 am
|
|
|
|
Khalid Ibn Walid The Pollen Shed Neither of these links support your claims... The first states that Muslims believe that Christianity distorts teachings of monotheism to include the Trinity. Nothing about the Ebionites rejecting these doctrines... The second doesn't mention the Trinity anywhere in the article. The early Christians were either united in their belief of orthodox Christianity, or were considered heretics and were excommunicated, being therefore no longer a part of the Church (this developed the need for creeds). I'm not sure where you're getting your history from, but you may need to do some further research. There is No Real Orthodox in Christianity Christians who didn't Believe in the Trinity were among the earliest Christians The Dogma of the Trinity didn't form until Much Later ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXRSAi93_aM
It doesn't matter if the word Trinity is not found in the bible,
or that it was articulated later by the church fathers, the concept
of the trinity is found in the Bible itself, regardless of being called by name or not. Making it pretty much dogma from the very beginning.
Old Testament Trinity Proof Texts
Genesis 1:26
"Let US make man in OUR image": Three plural pronouns, (We, Us, Our) used 6 different times in four different passages: Gen 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isa 6:8. The unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that the Father was talking to Jesus.
Genesis 19:24
"Then Yahweh [on earth in human form] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh [in spirit form in heaven] out of heaven. Genesis 19:24. In this text Abraham is visited by three individuals, one being Yahweh and the other two angels. Here we have God on the earth (Jesus) and God in heaven (father) sending down fire from heaven. This incident when Abraham met with Yahweh God, is what Jesus referred to when he said, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." (John 8:56) The unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that Jesus visited Abraham in Genesis 18 and 19.
Isaiah 6
Isaiah saw the glory of Yahweh, but John says that Isaiah really saw the glory of Christ. This proves Jesus is Yahweh. Combine this with the fact the Yahweh said, "Who will go for US" is a plural pronoun indicating more than one person in the Godhead.
Isaiah 40-55
Jesus echoes the "I AM" statements in Isaiah chapters 40-55.
Isaiah 45:23-24
I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness And will not turn back, That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance. "They will say of Me, 'Only in the Lord are righteousness and strength.' Men will come to Him, And all who were angry at Him shall be put to shame.
Micah 5:2
But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.
New Testament Trinity Proof Texts
Mark 2:5-12
Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.
John 5:18
For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
John 8:58
"Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." The Jews therefore said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple.
John 10:33
"I and the Father are one." The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. ... Has it not been written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'?"
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6
A simple reading of the context of John 12 makes it clear that John is saying that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus Christ himself in Isaiah 6. This proves Jesus is Yahweh.
John 19:7
The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God."
Romans 14:11
For it is written, "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall give praise to God."
Philippians 2:1-2
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.
Philippians 2:9-11
"Therefore also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
Revelation 22:3
"And there shall no longer be any curse; and the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His bond-servants shall [latreuo] serve Him."
Jesus worshipped in the highest sense of "latreuo" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
