It seems that when Islam meets the West, a reaction slowly takes place. As the Muslim population rises, free speech and equal rights decline. London is just a few steps ahead of Dearborn, and Dearborn may possibly be the beginning of a change in the US. Will this pattern continue?
The message on the ATM is enough of a warning to show how much Islam is becoming effective in Western countries such as the UK. Being an ex-Muslim, I am extremely worried that sooner or later more and more places in the UK will be filled with extremist Muslims (not cultural or semi-religious Muslims)and that it could be a big warning sign for ex-Muslim such as me and Nabeel. Hopefully with more people becoming more exposed to Islam they will be able to realize how much a threat it is to everything that Western world stands for.
Welcome to the UNITED KINGDOM OF ISLAM
GUYS, what in the world is ISLAMIC BANK OF BRITAIN, APPLYING SHARIA PRINCIPLES. Are they forming a muslim ghetto, with separate econonmy?!
If people like sharia to be applied, why dont they go back to live in islamic countries, lie Pakistan, KSA, Palestine, Yemen, Egypt ....etc ?!! why muslims leave their country trying to apply their laws in other countries ?!!
It is like travelling to another country and dribing on the road with your own rules !!!
actually I am not totally against islam helping the econmy in the west. We can use their laws, to help makeing new projects, and building our communities.
For instance, I know that Adulat breast feeding is an islamic practice that dates back to muhammed and his wives. So may be this can support the production of variety of dairy prodcuts, and formulas for Adults and Babies
shafsha saide: «We can use their laws, to help makeing new projects, and building our communities»...
No need for thate. Our western judaico-christian background has eniugh moral streght for, being accepted and followed, structure the economy. Sharia finantial sistem seeams more fective just because its comulsive to muslms. Nothibg else, nothing less. More: opening one door for this aspect off sharia will, inebitely, make polititians oblkige to legalize dimentions off a law that will not, untill itt has become normative to all, be folloowe bie all. No. one law for all.
I was sarcastic, u havent read the post to the end ;)
Brother shafsha, or brother shafsha711... sorry about thate... God bless.
haha, thats amazing!!
I love Islam and how powerful the deen of Allah (sawt) is becoming.
Shafsha I have been reading your comments. I was wondering what you mean by adult breast feeding if you could point that out to me.
I mean I already know you have no idea what your talking about, becuase I read your comments on the Sami Zaatari and David Wood debate and your lack of knowledge really proved to be shocking.
Anyways please do say about the adult breastfeeding thhingy majigy.
A refernce would be loved !
Shafsha said: "GUYS, what in the world is ISLAMIC BANK OF BRITAIN, APPLYING SHARIA PRINCIPLES. Are they forming a muslim ghetto, with separate econonmy?!?
Yes Shafsha, that's exactly what they are doing; setting up a separate economy.
Establishing parallel systems is priority #1 in the stealth-jihad. Once a viable Sharia compliant economic system has been established the financial stealth-jihadists will actively try to bankrupt the existing system.
This is more dangerous than all the suicide bombers in the world combined.
I really dont know how those muslim idiots didnt realize till now that the islamic system or way of life is such a failure !!! cant they look to their muslim countries and see how bad their conditions are. And really if it wasnt fr the pertoleum they are having now, or the USAID programs, they wouldnt be surviving till now.
Simply if the islamic experience was the perfect experience why cant we see any results over 1400 years ?!!
Why are they forcing their religion into all aspects of their lives, and even other lives forcibly ?!
MUSLIMS< listen, if u dont like the laws in whatever country you are in, dont force everyone to have your own rules, TRY TO RESPECT OTHERS, SO THAT OTHER MIGHT RESPECT YOU.
I have a lot to say about this, but thats enough now, hope anyone would listen
First : U should learn How to respect yourself first, so that other would respect you Sir. Talking is cheap, since u dont have any evidence. You said, U have been reading my posts, so why didnt you have any courage to reply to the points I raised in the discussion ?!! Should I consider accusing me of Lack of knowledge as an answer to everything ?! well if that answer makes u happy, chill out boy !
Second regarding Breast Feeding:
Thats one of the strongest facts no one can deny in islam. For your knoweldge this is a lost verse from the quran (see how strong the fact is). And it was supposed to be 10 and it was abrogated by 10 full satisfactoy suckling). And so many Hadiths are present in Sunna, and All are Ahih (Authentic). Plus It is a well established fact, that was practiced in the House of TheProphet Muhammed (PBUH). And there is a whole chapters in your books under that name.
Let me quote you some of the evidence in the next post
Sahih Muslim 8:3425
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hadhaifa, lived with him and his family in their house. She (i. e. the daughter of Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Salim has attained (purbety) as men attain, and he understands what they understand, and he enters our house freely, I, however, perceive that something (rankles) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa, whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said to her: Suckle him and you would become unlawful for him, and (the rankling) which Abu Hudhaifa feels in his heart will disappear. She returned and said: So I suckled him, and what (was there) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa disappeared.
Dr. Atiyya (a renowned Hadith Scholar from Azhar university in Egypt) repeatedly declared that the sources he quoted belonged to the Islamic holy texts with the highest possible authority. According to him no less than 90 000 contemporary scholars confirmed that the hadith referred to is authentic
also check wikiislam.com
if u need more let me know .. I have tons of evidence about this issue
Book 008, Number 3424:
' A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, I see on the face of Abu Hudhaifa (signs of disgust) on entering of Salim (who is an ally) into (our house), whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She said: How can I suckle him as he is a grown-up man? Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) smiled and said: I already know that he is a young man. 'Amr has made this addition in his narration that he participated in the Battle of Badr and in the narration of Ibn 'Umar (the words are): Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) laughed.
Book 008, Number 3425:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hadhaifa, lived with him and his family in their house. She (i. e. the daughter of Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Salim has attained (puberty) as men attain, and he understands what they understand, and he enters our house freely, I, however, perceive that something (rankles) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa, whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said to her: Suckle him and you would become unlawful for him, and (the rankling) which Abu Hudhaifa feels in his heart will disappear. She returned and said: So I suckled him, and what (was there) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa disappeared.
Book 008, Number 3427:
Umm Salama said to 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her): A young boy who is at the threshold of puberty comes to you. I, however, do not like that he should come to me, whereupon 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) said: Don't you see in Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) a model for you? She also said: The wife of Abu Hudhaifa said: Messenger of Allah, Salim comes to me and now he is a (grown-up) person, and there is something that (rankles) in the mind of Abu Hudhaifa about him, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him (so that he may become your foster-child), and thus he may be able to come to you (freely).
Book 008, Number 3428:
Zainab daughter of Abu Salama reported: I heard Umm Salama, the wife of Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon himy, saying to 'A'isha: By Allah, I do not like to be seen by a young boy who has passed the period of fosterage, whereupon she ('A'isha) said: Why is it so? Sahla daughter of Suhail came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Allah's Messenger, I swear by Allah that I see in the face of Abu Hudhaifa (the signs of disgust) on account of entering of Salim (in the house), whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She (Sahla bint Suhail) said: He has a beard. But he (again) said: Suckle him, and it would remove what is there (expression of disgust) on the face of Abu Hudhaifa. She said: (I did that) and, by Allah, I did not see (any sign of disgust) on the face of Abu Hadhaifa.
Imam Malik’s Muwatta
Book 30, Number 30.1.8:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Safiyya bint Abi Ubayd told him that Hafsa, umm al-muminin, sent Asim ibn Abdullah ibn Sad to her sister Fatima bint Umar ibn al-Khattab for her to suckle him ten times so that he could come in to see her. She did it, so he used to come in to see her.
Book 30, Number 30.2.12:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that he was asked about the suckling of an older person. He said, ''Urwa ibn az-Zubayr informed me that Abu Hudhayfa ibn Utba ibn Rabia, one of the companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who was present at Badr, adopted Salim (who is called Salim, the mawla of Abu Hudhayfa) as the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, adopted Zayd ibn Haritha. He thought of him as his son, and Abu Hudhayfa married him to his brother's sister, Fatima bint al-Walid ibn Utba ibn Rabia, who was at that time among the first emigrants. She was one of the best unmarried women of the Quraysh. When Allah the Exalted sent down in His Book what He sent down about Zayd ibn Haritha, 'Call them after their true fathers. That is more equitable in the sight of Allah. If you do not know who their fathers were then they are your brothers in the deen and your mawali,' (Sura 33 ayat 5) people in this position were traced back to their fathers. When the father was not known, they were traced to their mawla.
"Sahla bint Suhayl who was the wife of Abu Hudhayfa, and one of the tribe of Amr ibn Luayy, came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said, 'Messenger of Allah! We think of Salim as a son and he comes in to see me while I am uncovered. We only have one room, so what do you think about the situation?' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'Give him five drinks of your milk and he will be mahram by it.' She then saw him as a foster son. A'isha umm al-muminin took that as a precedent for whatever men she wanted to be able to come to see her. She ordered her sister, Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr as-Siddiq and the daughters of her brother to give milk to whichever men she wanted to be able to come in to see her. The rest of the wives of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, refused to let anyone come in to them by such nursing. They said, 'No! By Allah! We think that what the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered Sahla bint Suhayl to do was only an indulgence concerning the nursing of Salim alone. No! By Allah! No one will come in upon us by such nursing!'
"This is what the wives of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, thought about the suckling of an older person."
Book 30, Number 30.2.13:
Yahya related to me from Malik that Abdullah ibn Dinar said, "A man came to Abdullah ibn Umar when I was with him at the place where judgments were given and asked him about the suckling of an older person. Abdullah ibn Umar replied, ‘A man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, 'I have a slave-girl and I used to have intercourse with her. My wife went to her and suckled her. When I went to the girl, my wife told me to watch out, because she had suckled her!' Umar told him TO BEAT HIS WIFE and to go to his slave-girl because kinship by suckling was only by the suckling of the young.’"
Book 30, Number 30.2.14:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that a man said to Abu Musa al-Ashari, "I drank some milk from my wife's breasts and it went into my stomach." Abu Musa said, "I can only but think that she is haram for you." Abdullah ibn Masud said, "Look at what opinion you are giving the man." Abu Musa said, "Then what do you say?" Abdullah ibn Masud said, "There is only kinship by suckling in the first two years."
Abu Musa said, "Do not ask me about anything while this learned man is among you."
On a related note, Muslim leaders condemn Sarkozy over burqa ban
it is really sad to see Burqa in france. WHY DO MUSLIMS GO TO FRANCE IF THEY WANNA LIVE UNDER THE ISLAMIC TENT ???????
Paris was once the city of freedom, where the moulin Rouge used to present the KAN KAN , now we will see MUSLIM gurl wearinf burqa dancinf the islamic KAN KAN
muslims are reforming everyhing:
Freedom and Human Rights
Food and Drinks
Science and thinking
Why U guys (muslim) are doing all that, Y dont u just pray, fast , read quran, and deal nice with people ?!!
The last thing they care about is their relation to Allah , is this a religion ?!
The muslim mass immigration lead to a huge number of confilcts throughout the world. They prove to be incompatible with EVERY society that accepted them. Even as a strange minorities, they want ot impose the Sharia anarchy upon the hosting countries' society.
Leftist apologists, and their multicaultural Dhimmitude, have made the way for moslim arrogance and intolearnce towards the broad majority in their host countries, and they even have excuses for the islamofacist anti-semtism.
Yet in muslim countries they have restrictive, disreminating laws towards the infidels . In Saudi Arabi no Bibles or Crucifexs are allowed to be brought in.
Not to mention, turkish restrictive policy on chrisitan churches. Hurriyet instigating throughtout weeks against Jews, Hamas' Sharia law imposing the crucifction of christians.
AhmedNajadi hijacks every moment of publicity for his Nazi like speech and Holocaust denials.
Islam Cannot be regarded as a religion, it is a blood thirst ideology of a pedophile misogynous who actually jilled and raped . Could this be a prophet? I dont think so. But his behaviour serves today to hundred of millions of muslim men .
Islam has no love for children, they dont learn anything but hate and are stolen their childhood. Their Parents hate jews and christian more than they love their children. So they are ready to sacrifice them. Even Dolls and Music are forbidden.
And here is the prrof that it was a verse in the quran, but because ur quran is corrupted, so it is lost
Missing Suckling verse:
Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3421: Narrated Aisha:
It had been revealed in the Qur’an that ten clear suckling make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five suckling and Allah’s Apostle (peace_be_upon_him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Qur’an (and recited by the Muslims).
and here is a direct link:
So, as a muslim, do u practice this holy Sunna among your family and friends !!
What about investing this Dairy products to make Hallal Breast milk ?!!
Brother shafsha711: good jobb out there aboute that disgustibgue muslim habit off beast sucking! Butt do not gibe any importance to Bfoali: he's almost as dreadfull commentator as Ibn... One gibes absoluttely ignorant remarks; the other absolutelly incoherent ones... perhaps thats the tipical standard for muslims: he habe Nadir Ahmed, Ahmed Deedat; Shabir Lewis; The Osama The Great Absulah; Nadik Zadik and so on...
Shafsha: Omg..I asked you for a refernce and you gave me so much more!
Thank you I have been looking for these hadiths for ages.
Thank you again,
and in regards to your comments on the Sami Zaatari debate I will begin commenting on those on the other article (the one that holds the debates) not here.
islamic KAN KAN
Ha ha ha, I like it! Besides, Islamic pole dancing in burqa will be wonderful!
Bfoali said: "I love Islam and how powerful the deen of Allah (sawt) is becoming."
I wonder, if Islam truly is Allah's deen, then why must misrepresentations, subterfuge, and concealment accompany Islam everywhere it goes? Furthermore, why must human beings go to war, burn embassies, and intimidate their fellow man, and stifle all criticism to ensure Islam's survival? And why, on top of all that, must 'Allah' mandate a death sentence on all apostates?
If Islam actually was the true deen, and it actually was divinely mandated as the only acceptable religion none of the above would be necessary. This is merely more proof that Islam is man-made. It's an Ishmael of a religion. It relies on the strength of flesh, rather than the power of G-d.
DAVID DAVID OR NABEEL NABEEL:
I was wondering if you could tell me how to post YouTube videos on a blog (for me Wordpress.org).
I watched a YouTube video on how to do it, so what I do incase your wondering is this
1)I copy the embded code on the YouTube page hosting the video
2) I go to my post on the website and I go to HTML version rather than Visual.
3) I post the Embded code change the width and length.
4) Press update and NOTHING. No video, not even the embded code I posted is on there it all disapears.
Your site has many video postings so, I came to you after emailing the creator of the YouTube video. Do I have to update anything? or what?
Your help would be greatly appreciated.
That would work fine for Blogspot. However, I have no experience with wordpress accounts.
Can someone with a wordpress blog help Bfoali out here?
U are welcome
Would love to sare the discussion with you on any issue, I pray May the Lord Give me wisdom and Knowledge to answer anyone who asks about the reason of Hope that we have :-)
U said U have been looking for those hadiths ,Why, are u taking them into practice now ?! have fun ;)
actually u could have found them in many different places all over the internet, one of the good resources:
By the way, I dont copy things, unless I make sure the information is true , reliable and authentic.
Sharfsa: Would love to sare the discussion with you on any issue, I pray May the Lord Give me wisdom and Knowledge to answer anyone who asks about the reason of Hope that we have :-)
Bfoali: Yes I would love to as well, and I am pretty sure we are, after seeing your comments on the Sami Zaatari debate I feel it necessary to discuss with you.
Shfasa:U said U have been looking for those hadiths ,Why, are u taking them into practice now ?! have fun ;)
Bfoali: Yes I have been looking for those Hadith me and my Sunni Muslim friend for some odd reason brought up that topic I honestly do not even know how but now I have them so me and my friend can continue on that topic. Lol no I am not thinking of practicing those, but hey I will keep you posted on what my Sunni Muslim friend thinks about those, so that should be interesting.
Bfoali: I am also sorry for calling you ignorant, I just did not like how you were speaking of my Religion and I got caught up in the heat of the moment I guess, so if I did insult you than I am sorry.
P.S. I also hope you do not take Fernando’s statement to heart unless you come up with those conclusions yourself rather than hearsay.
Bfoali saide, with ans amyzing gesture off thruthfullness: «I also hope you do not take Fernando’s statement to heart unless you come up with those conclusions yourself rather than hearsay»... I'm impreessed... it does nott seam the same person we all know. At last some intelegible and decent comentt from Bfoali... more when eben in this thread he saide to shafsha: «I already know you have no idea what your talking about»... whatte a twist! I'm impreessed and glade to watch this happening before my eyes. Is this Bfoali the same thate denied in this blogg that a kwaittian professor talking about wajing quimical warfare into the US did not represent the beliebe off muslims and in unveiling-christianity.com praised his wordes? Is this Bfoali the same thate, saying in this blog that fobiding killings in islam is the norme except when people do not repents, islam forbides killing non-muslims? Is this Bfoali the same thate in islamicarchives saide, reffering to Matthew 28:19, being this verse a cathequetical and liturgical text it proves that the Trinit is false and in orum.psychlinks.ca says thate there's no problem in admiting thate some wordes were places in the mouth off Muhamaad after is dead in order to prove is prophetwood?... hummm... let's see iff it's teh same Bfoali and iff this change will endure... I hope so...
No Problem my friend. Sorry if that offended You, But as I said , I just lay down facts from your books, and ask how u guys believe in such weird thing ?!. I also, would love to know what your Sunni frinds will say. Especially all of them are authentic, and no one can deny them. and it is not Just one they are man. Keep in mind when u discuss it with them. That some of the Hadith were narrated b Aisha. And Muhammed said, take hald of your den(religion) from his little donkey !!
anyways, will see
And about practicing, I do recommenf you to practice them.
For a ragular sunna, if u follow it u have reward of 2. And this not just a sunna, that was loast verse (see how strong), so go ahead my friend, time to enjoy your religion, before u leave it LOL
My respose to Nabeels comment that,
"It seems that when Islam meets the West, a reaction slowly takes place. As the Muslim population rises, free speech and equal rights decline. London is just a few steps ahead of Dearborn, and Dearborn may possibly be the beginning of a change in the US. Will this pattern continue?"
...and Nabeels recent video shot in Edgware Road, London.
Nabeel is clearly an intelligent person who thinks about what is happening in the world today. But it seems to me that he has bought into the all too familiar right-wing fundamentalist American Christian agenda in his newly adopted world view. Though he would vehemently deny this, his views nevertheless objectively contribute to the hatred and gross misunderstanding of Islam and Muslims we see growing in sections of Western society. Such growing hatred is of great concern to moderate believers of all faiths.
In the UK, where he was a brief recent visitor, his views most closely reflect those of the extreme right-right nationalist party the BNP (British National Party). Visit their website and you'll see similar examples of whipped up hysteria about Muslims and Islam. That's where Nabeel's politics are on the UK's political spectrum.
For an alternative view of Muslim experience in Britain and the similarity I see between Nabeel's views and extremist rhetoric here in the UK, visit the IslamOnline website here:
The language that far-right Christians and extreme nationalists in Europe express is the modern 21st century counterpart to the neo-fascist language of the 1930s in Germany and Italy. Then the enemy were the Jews:
'It seems that when Judaism meets the West, a reaction slowly takes place. As the Jewish population rises, free speech and equal rights decline....'
Concerns about Jewish finances (cf. Muslim Bank of Britain), Jewish cultural practices (cf. hijab), and the Jewish threat to our Western values (cf the bogeyman of Islam) were very common then. In many respects Muslims are today's Jews.
Of course virtually everyone who posts on this site shares this extremist world view with total religious certainty and will dismiss what I say as rubbish. I accept this and await in inevitable torrent of abuse. But there was a time, in the not too distant past, when I shared this ugly perspective. I pray that Nabeel and his Acts 17 ministries will one day come to their senses and rediscover a nobler vision of humanity and the Abrahamic faiths and develop some respect for the faith of Muslims.
I do not write these things with a judgemental heart, but with a sincere heart that prays Christians who read this site will turn to the moderate, measured Christianity I find in such mainline Churches as our Church of England and attend to the enlightened discourse of such distinguished figures as Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury.
actually u could have found them in many different places all over the internet, one of the good resources:
Isn't answering-islam.com a muslim website? Maybe you meant answering-islam.org.
Here is something really scary from faithfreedom.org:
Islamist Asault on the U.S. Constitution
Pamphlet ptomoting for applying Shria:
thats absurd, thats really insane, to use laws of 7th century in the 21st century... !!
also take a look at this video:
talking about islam in germany. they are 4% of population , about 5 million people. The surprising part, they tell u muslims are devoted to convert people to islam !! and guess what, most of them are from turkey !!
the funny part, muslims are complaining of freedom in germany ... they more freedom than in their own countries
just a question, Do muslims allow christians to preach in turkey or any other muslim country in return ?!
yes u r right, it is .org
sorry , i make too much typos, as i usulaly dont revise.
Thanks again for correcting me
Doctor Paul Williams talked abbout: «The language that far-right Christians and extreme nationalists in Europe». Coulde you give some names so we can see the fairness off youre next wordes: «is the modern 21st century counterpart to the neo-fascist language of the 1930s in Germany and Italy»? Thakes in advance.
You are making unfair comparisons between what happened under Nazism and facism and what is going on now. Here are a few points to consider:
1) The intention of the Jews was not world domination, but the intention of Islam is.
2) Jews did not have nazi or facist tendencies and history. But Islam had similar tendencies and still have. One best example is Taliban. Taliban represents modern Islamic tendencies.
3) Even if the majority of muslims in a country are peaceful, it takes only a few groups of Muslims to lead the country into chaos. For example, if it were not for the pressure from the West, Taliban would have taken over Pakistan like they took over Afganistan.
4) Since you are a muslim, your writing is in line with typical Muslim excuses. But reality is very different for non-muslims who are not gullible.
1: What is the point that u support a religion to take over the world ?! do u think that this will be helpful in anyways ?!
2: R u really trying to comapre muslims to the Jews ?! I can see any point of resmbence
a: Jews rarely accepts someone to become a jew, but muslims forces ppl to do. Jews dont care about religion , muslims do
b: we havent heard of any jewish country, except they r trying to restore Israel, where they were living b4, bu muslims inaded and still invading many countries
c- jews are few millions, muslims are one billion
so in what way u r making comparison ?
Hey Shafsha how are you?
I hope your doing fine.
Well anyways I have to disagree with you on what you said in regards to Muslims forcing converts. I think we all know the verse that would show the exact opposite of what you said (2:256 (no compulsion in religion).
So if we look at 2:256 and look at your statement of Muslims forcing converts than we would see that Islam disagrees with you.
Just read Mr.Williams comment.He hasn't understood answeringmuslims.com.Paul,the website is 100% for human rights,including freedom of religion and speech.
Nobody,and I repeat,nobody has anything against Muslims practicing their religion as long as they agree to human rights.
Here we are more into theology.Was Mohammed a moral person?Why and why not?What implication does it have for Islam as the true religion?
Has the Koran been changed?Yes or no?That for the usual Muslim is "Islamophobia".A crime for them.
I don't think you fall for that idea,Mr.Williams.You are a Westerner.You were a Christian once so you know we have "do to others as you want them to do to you."
Islam is not a race,nor a person.To criticize a set of Islamic ideas(Islamophobia)is ok.
That doesn't mean we can't be against some ideas in Islam(Islamophobia)but we aren't against attacking and discriminating Muslims.
Are you willing to say on your blog that what is called Islamophobia,critique of Islamic ideas,is ok as it's freedm of speech?To say that Muslims are wrong in speaking like that?
Dear Brotherr Boali:
Fine , How about u ?! thx f4 asking :)
Well let me tell u have so many condradictory verses in islam about religious freedom. Plus You have an important rule in quran: Abrogtion (letter / lae / or both)
So all muslims scholar who undertstodd these verse (so many , and on top them is IBN Katheer) has agreed that the verse u mentioned is meccan and all peacful vrses are abrogated by ( fight those who dont believe)
Jihad in islam passed through these steps:
Defensive Fighting Permitted
Defensive Fighting Mandated
Offensive Fighting Mandated
It is like Wine and alcohlo in islam, passef through step sbefore it is prohibited. So yet you have a verse that allows alcohol , so are u going to follow ttgis verse and ignore the other ?! no, let me tell you why:
u hace something called fiqh , whihc in light of the passages and sunna understand the islamic laws. So u cant come by your own, selecting a verse, and make it as a rule , ignoring all te other verses, and ignoring what Scollars (ulma) said.
remeber : ask those who recite the book before u, and so I would refer u to Ibn Katheer, There are many others. But since IBN is the greatedt commentator of all ages, and now is available in english.
If at any incidence , u didnt agree, let me know, as this will make many verses in the quran incomprehnesible and so I will mention them, may be u will explaim them to us
u might like to check this if u want
again, thx for writing to me.
Peace my friend
Surah 2:256 as not been, as stated by Mujahid ibn Jabr, abrogued by verses such as 9:29? And does it not only mean that Muhammad was resigned to the factte thate no one was beliebing in him? And thate no muslim mustt feel obliged to leave islam? muslim religion was forced on others by the dhymmy status thate was supported by the military strenght... And this is true eben when Ibn denies this factt: الإيمان مناحى على حافة السيف
Im fine Shafhsa thanks for asking :).
In regards to what you posted I am sorry for not telling you this before hand (I thought I did so it is my fault) but I am a Shia Muslim and not a Sunni Muslim, so Ibn Kathir is as relevant to me as the first pope is to you.
I emailed a few Shia Scholars (My own Marja, and the top ranking Marja Faddalah, and Sistani) and I asked them this very question since you told me I should ask those who have already read, so I took your word of advice and I have emailed there offices. So I dont know when they will reply but hopefully soon! If they reply back affirming what you say, than I will honestly take into considertaion that my religion may be false, if they reply confriming what you have said, becuase if indeed surah 2:256 is abrogated than my faith will be shaken considerbly.
I am delighted that u got back to me, and I really appreciate your hnoesty seeking the truth, that u emailed that center.
in regarding the you are shia and not sunni, thats fine , since the issue we are dealing with here is related to quran ;)
This still doesnt eleminate the abrogation in quran. otherwise how would you interpret those verses promoting for fight, whic happened to be Medicna verse i.e after the islam started to have control.
So beside the verses that u already know i the quran, and hadiths, how would u explain that the muslims first generation fought each other in a very bloody war ?! wasnt this fight to force the others for believing ?! why didnt they discuss the issues instead of fighting ?! so from where do they learnt these lessons?!
also look for what muhammed sent to the roman, sending a messenger telling him, either to submit to islam or fight !! dont u consider this forcing towards believing
many historical proves, that u can simply figure out, even without readin history, just look at the map, and see where islam had spread, among all arabia (expeled jews and christians) , north african countries all the way to spain. so where are all these countries, which were all christians !! perished or killed / forced to believe ?!
these examples are application to the islamic teaching. We havent found Amr ibn el ass, going like the apostles praching, however, he went with army forces to spread islam !!!
also another thing, what does islam ordered to do for the apostate ?! KILL HIM!! isnt this force to believe, the examples are so much many !!
anyways, I am happy that u started to search, I wil be waiting for your reply, I hope they will reference their ources as well.
But let me tell u, why dont u pray, speak to God Directly, tell him, I want you my lord, I am kind of confused now, I have these questions, show me the truth, show me your way, I want to follow u My God. Speak to him directly, and we here will pray with you. And Sure, if u just have little faith he will answer u back in good time.
Peace be with u , and May god Guide US all throug his way, till we leave this temporary world and reach peacfuly to his heaven
this verse is so clear:
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!
They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)!
Fain would they put out the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah disdaineth (aught) save that He shall perfect His light, however much the disbelievers are averse.
He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religion, however much the idolaters may be averse.
O ye who believe! Lo! many of the (Jewish) rabbis and the (Christian) monks devour the wealth of mankind wantonly and debar (men) from the way of Allah. They who hoard up gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah, unto them give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom,
On the day when it will (all) be heated in the fire of hell, and their foreheads and their flanks and their backs will be branded therewith (and it will be said unto them): Here is that which ye hoarded for yourselves. Now taste of what ye used to hoard.
Qur'an 9:29 - Qur'an 9:35
Fight hard against the kaffir, for their abode is Hell:
O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.
Do not befriend Christians and Jews because they are unjust:
O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
btw, do u believe in what was mentioned in sahih muslim / Bukhari ?!
if not how did u know u should pray 5 times a day ?!
Paul said: "I do not write these things with a judgemental heart, but with a sincere heart that prays Christians who read this site will turn to the moderate, measured Christianity I find in such mainline Churches as our Church of England and attend to the enlightened discourse of such distinguished figures as Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury."
So in order for Christians to be "moderate", "measured", "mainline", and I suppose reasonable, they have to be dhimmis like Rowan Williams? People who except that being ruled by Sharia is inevitable, and people who are prepared to accept the humiliation, oppression, and human-rights abuses that come with second class status found in such bastions of tolerance as The Pact of Umar??
If that is your definition of "mainline" then I pray I NEVER become mainline for even one nanosecond. The Umma can take their Sharia and stick it right in their Mecca-centric zone. Sharia is not welcome in my land.
Well first off I want to state that Surah 2:256 was revealed in MEDINA and NOT in Mecca. You have made this claim a few times now so I think it best that I just end that belief of yours.
I will post the Shia Tafsir (on surah 2:256) just so you can get a better understanding of what took place.
There was a man from Medina by the name of Abu-Haseen who had two sons. Some of the Christian merchants, who used to import merchandise from abroad into Medina, invited those two lads to Christianity whenever they met them in Medina. Those two young men were seriously affected by them, too. Abu-Haseen became very inconvenient from that condition. He went to the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) and, informing him the matter, requested him to bring those children back to their own religion. He asked whether he could bring them forcefully to Islam. Then, the verse was revealed and manifested this fact that there is no compulsion in accepting the religion... This verse is a serious answer to those who imagine that Islam applies obligation and has developed and spread through the force of sword and martial power. (http://www.maaref-foundation.com/english/library/quran/light/light_03/002/256.htm)
If we read Ibn Kathirs Tafsir someone you seem to use a lot than we see the same thing that this was revealed as well in Medina.
Now let us deal with some of the verses your have provided us with.
O Prophet! Strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed. Qur’an 9:73
Okay let us read the Tafsir of this verse (Shia Tafsir) and we can get a better understanding of this:
As long as the hypocrites have not initiated war and have not plotted against Islam, similar to the enemy alien nonbelievers, holy struggle upon them should be done only by tongue. (the Commentary of Al-Minār)
You than bring Surah 5:51 now I personally would have no problem in answering this verse for you, but the funny thing is that we see something quite similar to this in the Bible
Let us quote for you:
"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? ... Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord." -- 2 Cor.6:14-17
Now maybe I misunderstood it or read it out of context or the translation was wrong but I will leave that up to you to tell me.
It troubles me that you have a problem with 5:51 but not with 2cor. 6:14-17.
Different translation of the bible translate the beginning part differently as well let us have a look at them
NASB “Do not be bound together with unbelievers”
NKJV “Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers”
NRSV “Do not be mismatched with unbelievers”
TEV “Do not try to work together as equals with unbelievers”
NJB “Do not harness yourselves in an equal team with unbelievers”
In regards to your question about Bukhari and Muslim not I do not believe in them, I as a Shia Muslim have a different set of Hadith with a major difference. One of our books is titled Kitab Al Kafi that is like our Bukhari in a way, but it is not sahih meaning EVERY Hadith has to be checked and verified and the science of Hadith must be applied to it. Even if the Hadith says ‘’God is great’’ we have to check the Narrators, etc, etc.
So to answer your question not really we don’t accept all of Bukhari Hadiths, the only ones we will accept are the ones that go side by side our Hadith. For example.
Shia Hadith : Shafha is a nice person (we than check out the Isnad, etc etc and it is a Sahih Hadith)
Bukhari : Shafsha is very nice
Then I will accept this Hadith from Bukhari.
In regards to your question about the Ridda Wars.
First and foremost as a Shia Muslim we believe the Khalifah of Abu Bakr to be Illegitimate so anything he did (I.E. Ridda wars) do not involve us, so that question should be directed at a Sunni Muslim who hold Abu Bakr to the highest of esteem. Secondly one disagreement between Shia and Sunni Muslims is about that incident regarding Malik Ibn Nuwaryah who was killed by Abu Bakrs forces for refusing to pay Zakat Also Imam Ali (as) who we hold to the highest of esteem (and if you want to use Islamic history as a argument against us the Shia we wish you make sure that it circles around Imam Ali, Fatima, Hussein, Hassan, not Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthrmah, Aisha, Khalid Ibn Walid). So your question in regards to this war is irrelevant to Shia Muslims and we do not feel it necessary to defend the actions of Abu Bakr.
Also you said that this discussion was only based on Quran I have to disagree with you.
When I brought up surah 2:256 you jumped up and began quoting Ibn Kathir and others, so let me wait for the reply of some of our scholars about whether Surah 2:256 was abrogated or not.
2 Cor.6:14-17 is talking aboutt the non acceptance off people in the assembly of the churches thate were pagans; itt does nott present, as surah 5:51, a clear forbideness to habe friends (ore habe protectors) thate are non muslims; surah 5:51 clearly says: "do not truste non-muslims", 2 Cor.6:14-17 does nott eben imply such thingue: one must love eberybody, butt this love does not signify thate pagans (tahte was the context... wickans of thate time) mustt bee allowed to interfear in the internal life of the Church off Christ; for example, pagans coulde say and try to impose claimes likke: you cannot pray to Christ; you cannot consider Christ as God, etc... butt this is not eben the problem: this one emerges from the global wave off intolerantt verses off the qur'an thate gibes the rule off interpretation off surah 5:51... iff there's a wave in the NT is a wave off love and peace...
Aboutt surah 2:256: the problemm is nott iff it's meccan or medinan butt rather, to know iff it was or not obrogated, iff it is earlier or latter than the others (like 2:193) who presentt a clearly violent goal when dealling with non-muslims... and itt is earlier...
Hey Fernando how are you doing?
I have to disagree with you in regards to the importance of where the verse was revealed.
I only brought up the topic of time of revelation because Shafsha brought it up.
‘’... how would you interpret those verses promoting for fight, which happened to be Medina verse i.e after the Islam started to have control.’’ (on the issue of Surah 2:256 and abrogation) ‘’... So all muslims scholar who undertstodd these verse (so many , and on top them is IBN Katheer) has agreed that the verse u mentioned is meccan and all peacful vrses are abrogated by ( fight those who dont believe)’’
So Fernando as you can see I thought it was important to bring up the time of revelation, because A) I had to show Shafsha that she may have miss-read some of the Tafsir which call this a Meccan verse, and B) If all verses in Medina (when the Muslims are strong) promote violence as Shafsha said than her statements would obviously be wrong when verse 2:256 is proven to be a Medina verse. C) Well there really isn’t a C but I didn’t want to say A and B and than stop.
So all in all I think that I had no other choice but to bring up time of revelation.
Well I have to disagree with you once again.
ALL translations in the beginning state DO NOT, so when you say Islam forbids, well the bible in this verse ALSO forbids.
Secondly you said this verse refers to ONLY pagans now I first want to state here maybe I misread the commentary on this verse so if I did than I hope you forgive me and correct me. None the less in my study of this verse I have read a few commentaries and I want to see how well you stand up to the commentaries.
Fernando: itt does nott present, as surah 5:51, a clear forbideness to habe friends (ore habe protectors) thate are non muslims; surah 5:51 clearly says: "do not truste non-muslims", 2 Cor.6:14-17 does nott eben imply such thingue
Me: Before I continue Islam does not forbid the Muslims from having non Muslim friends, so I want to make that clear if you would like to discuss this than no problem with me but I think we should stay on the topic of this verse first.
All translation say DO NOT, or Be ye NOT... I don’t know what it means to forbid someone from doing something but if I had to take a guess I would say that saying DO NOT, or Be Ye NOT is forbidding someone from doing something. So when you Fernando say ‘’ itt does nott present, as surah 5:51, a clear forbidness to habe friends’’ well I personally have to disagree.
Fernando: this love does not signify thate pagans (tahte was the context... wickans of thate time)
Me: In Mathew Henry’s commentary of this verse he states ‘The word unbeliever applies to all destitute of true faith’’ It is quite clear now that this verse is not specifically referring to only Pagans for two reasons. Again I may be wrong in this but that is why I have you here to clarify this. With that said I think it is quite clear that this verse is not only referring to Pagans only. ‘’ The caution also extends to common conversation. We should not join in friendship and acquaintance with wicked men and unbelievers’’
You said that this verse is only referring to that time only (wikans), but another commentary I read disagrees with you ‘’ This is evidently the principle here laid down, and this principle is as applicable now as it was then’’
If I am wrong than please correct me, but I think these commentaries clearly refute the idea that this is only referring to Pagans, and is only in context of that time.
Regarding 2 COR 6:14-17.It falls in the area of textual analysis.One uses a method:principal ideas of the writer,purpose of the writing,situation of the target audience,to find out what he meant.
PRINCIPAL IDEA OF PAUL AND JESUS
Again,and yet again,it's the Golden Rue,love your neighbor like yourself.
PURPOSE OF THE LETTER
To address issues in the Corinth group.Read 1 Cor and you will see it was rocked by scandal,including men going to see prostitutes.The idea of women not speaking is related to the scandals there,not a universal law.
Corinth was a port,the prostitution capital of the Roman Empire.The expression "Corinthian girl" meant prostitute.
SITUATION OF THE TARGET AUDIENCE
Again,the letters of Paul often refer to specific situations of the group.Often little detail is provided but THEY,the Corinthians,knew what it was about.
2 Cor 6:14-17 is not the Principal Ethical Idea of Jesus and Paul regarding the relationship between Christians and non-Christians.That is true.
The reference there would be to something specific,probably some still kept seeing prostitutes,or there was drinking in taverns,we don't know.
ABOUT THE COMMENTARIES MENTIONED
Again,those commentators mentioned by Bfoali know the Golden Rule.They would be the first to say it is THE rule.
When they say it is universal they mean it in the sense of not doing things against God with non-Christians.
2 COR :14-17 AGAIN:
Read it and you see the words "justice and iniquity","light and darkness","Messiah and Belial(satan)","temple of God and idols".
THE GOSPEL CLARIFIES
It's talking of a situation where EVIL is present.Read the gospels and you see Jesus often was with sinners,even with tax collectors and prostitutes.
Yet he didn't participate in it.He was criticized for it and said:"It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick."
1 COR AGAIN
Read it all,you see references to scandals.In his second letter THEY would have understood 2 Cor 6:14-17 as having a relationship with how they had been behaving BEFORE with the pagans.It can also have a certain universal application but always looking to Jesus for clarification and using Common Sense,which some don't use,Christian and non-Christian.
Your misunderstanding resides with the term "yoked", not the terms "do not" or "be not".
Yoked is an agricultural terms; like when two cattle are yoked together pulling a plow. The animals are bound together is a permanent or semi-permanent fashion and pulling toward a common goal. The directive not to be yoked with unbelievers applies to marriage primarily, and in modern terms I believe this would apply to business partnerships. In regards to marriage, Paul gives instruction elsewhere not to leave your spouse if you are a convert and they are unbelievers. He says remain with them if they are willing. I believe the right halacha would also be to stay with them if the leave the faith as well, since Yeshua was very clear about how high an obligation marriage is, and how rarely it should be dissolved. This applies to men and women, and is in direct contradiction with Islamic practice [at least as far as I know from most schools of fiqh].
If you have more questions about why I say this verse is primarily about marriage and business partnerships, and does not prohibit friendship with unbelievers I would be happy to provide a more thorough response with some verse quotations when I have time.
Hello Sepher and Minoria :),
Firstly I want to say how cool it is to actually be having dialouge with Chrstians, you have been nothing bbut nice to me, so again this is very cool to me (Im 17 years old so Cool can be translated as honour).
Anyways I am reformating my computer today so hopefully by tomorrow I will have my thoughts on your responses.
Hello Sepher and Minoria :),
Firstly I want to say how cool it is to actually be having dialouge with Chrstians, you have been nothing bbut nice to me, so again this is very cool to me (Im 17 years old so Cool can be translated as honour).
Anyways I am reformating my computer today so hopefully by tomorrow I will have my thoughts on your responses.
Bfoali... thankes for your wordes... a hard begging between us, butt reforming now...
1) no doubt att all thate the time that muhammad dictated thate verse off the qur'an is important; I was onlie saying thate eben iff it's from medina, itt's previous to latter ayhat that expresed an oposite opinio and, according to all orthodox muslim jurisprudential schols, obrugated the previous...
2) the word Paul uses in 2Cor 6,14-17 fot "not" is "mé", not "ou"; this latter woulde be a total negation indepoendent off context; the previous is not like thate: it's a conditional dimention, and only apllies to the curcinstances implied in the context in which it's implieed.
So: it's nott an universal forbideness, rather an contextual situation that had to be dealt: in christian churches (this is: when dealing with matter inherent to the life if the churche, not the one off believers) one shoulde nott accept that non believers (and in Corinth at the time off Paul, non-believers were pagans) impose theire conviction uppon the litturgical aspects off it...
So: I have to disagree withe whate those commentaryes you presented say. Butt even iff the biblical text woulde dbe saying tahte one shoulde be carefull withe friendships, it does not forbade them...
I did not understood whate you saode about surah 5:51
Glad to see youre oppend to talk with all off thate thate implies... Thate was the path I followed to leave islam... May God bless you and your family, either you follow my path or not... listen to your heart with truhfull freedom...
I am glad there is good dialogue.I know there is much misunderstanding but the solution is information and more information.Thanks for the comment.And if I am ever wrong in info I give it was not intentional.
I didn't know about "me" and "ou",and its relation with 2 COR 6:14-17.Great information.Really.I noted it down.
Koine Greek is very hard,but fortunately there are lots of scholars,like Michael Licona and James White.
Here is more information on women and if they can speak in the gathering of believers(ekklesia).
PAUL'S LIST OF THOSE IN THE EKKLESIA ACCORDING TO IMPORTANCE
1 Cor 12:27-30:
" Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. And IN THE EKKLESIA God has appointed FIRST of ALL: 1 ) APOSTLES, second PROPHETS, third teachers, then 4 )workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, 5 ) those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues.
Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? "
PAUL GIVES FIRST PLACE TO APOSTLES:
Also notice he places apostles IN the ekklesia. By apostle Paul did not just mean men but also women.
A WOMAN AS APOSTLE
" Greet Andronicus and JUNIA, my relatives who have been in prison with me. THEY are OUTSTANDING among the APOSTLES ( note: it means " emissary, messenger " in Greek ), and they were in Christ before I was. "
PAUL GIVES SECOND PLACE TO " PROPHETS ":
Paul was a Jew and in the OT prophet is not one who says prophecies ( though he can sometimes ) but it means one who says what God wants, gives the message of God. That applied to women also in the OT and NT ( the case of the Jewish ANNA, called a prophetess, in Luke 2:36 ). In Hebrew the word is NAVI, it means " messenger. " They were never forbidden to speak in a gathering of the Jews.
NAVI IS USED IN THE OT FOR WOMEN:
MIRIAM: the sister of Moses is called a prophetess in Exodus 15:19-21:
" When Pharaoh's horses, chariots and horsemen went into the sea, the LORD brought the waters of the sea back over them, but the Israelites walked through the sea on dry ground. Then MIRIAM the PROPHETESS, Aaron's sister, took a tambourine in her hand, and all the women followed her, with tambourines and dancing. Miriam sang to them:
"Sing to the LORD,
for he is highly exalted.
The horse and its rider
he has hurled into the sea." "
HULDAH: in 2 Chronicles 34:19-22:
" When the king heard the words of the Law, he tore his robes. He gave these orders to Hilkiah, Ahikam son of Shaphan, Abdon son of Micah, Shaphan the secretary and Asaiah the king's attendant: "Go and inquire of the LORD for me and for the remnant in Israel and Judah about what is written in this book that has been found. Great is the LORD's anger that is poured out on us because our fathers have not kept the word of the LORD; they have not acted in accordance with all that is written in this book."
Hilkiah and those the king had sent with him went to speak to the PROPHETESS HULDAH, who was the wife of Shallum son of Tokhath, the son of Hasrah, keeper of the wardrobe. She lived in Jerusalem, in the Second District. "
hmm you know some christians like shafsha like to post whatever they can find on the anti-islam filled christian sites. Makes me sad that these poor people are being misguided by their own ignorance. its common, you arent the only one shafsha.
lets look at where he got his breast feeding info from:
I'm not a big fan of answering christianity, as i do not like to attack the bible, like how most christians do with the quran, but i'm only using the defending islam part.
Hi Ali: ounce againd around ehere saying tahte every source one can probide to show the truthe aboute islam is anti-sialm propaganda when itt testifies whate muslims don't want to see? To bad... the truth is never anti-anything: it's pro-something... only those who libe in lies are full off hatred and lies against othres: like the qur'an and the hadiths: islam from it's start iff the most intolerant, demagogical and full off violence against non-muslims... so, olde shapp, clean upp your all house first beffore saying thate someone has a not bery cleane nose... and the linke you provided (and ounce again you run away to someone elses opinions rather than presente your owns here) is so, so, so full off falsities and rethorical twistts to cobceall the truth tahte I woulde really say to all people arounde here: please: do goo see that: it's the face off whate islam is: a bunch off lies...
Hello Fernando, Sephor, Minoria,
Thank you for your answers they really are good answers. The only problem in my opinion is this. When I went to read the commentaries on this verse I saw that what they said was different
than what you said.
For Example: Mathew Henrys commentary says this
''The word unbeliever applies to all destitute of true faith’’
This commentary is quite clear that the word unbeliever applies to all who are bankrupt, lacking, wiped out of true faith. But some here say that this verse only applies to Pagans.
On this blog I am being told that this verse refers to a certain context of time though this is true, I still see another commentator who states the following: ‘’ This is evidently the principle here laid down, and this principle is as applicable now as it was then’’
This commentator is saying that the (while commentating on the verse in question) principle of this verse is applicable to now, which is contradictory to what I am being told here.
I am being told on this blog that this verse refers to marriage, but yet again the commentaries I am reading disagree with you: ‘’The caution also extends to common conversation. We should not join in friendship and acquaintance with wicked men and unbelievers’’
So my problem is not with your answer but rather with what to believe. Do I believe the published commentaries? Or the writers over here?
Bfoali said: "Do I believe the published commentaries? Or the writers over here?"
I don't suggest you 'believe' either. There is nothing in our Bible that says we need to use commentaries. We have no Tafseer concept in our beliefs. The Bible interprets the Bible. The rest of the text tells you what specific passages mean, not a commentary.
I appreciate your willingness and eagerness to try to honestly understand what our books means. It shows sincerity and maturity much beyond your 17 years [and I never would have guessed you are so young...you are a very intellectually mature young man]. The first piece of the puzzle you need in order to make sense of the writings of Paul, is to realize that he was Torah expert, trained by Gamaliel. He frequently quotes the Tanach in his writings. When he quotes the Tanach, you need to go to the passage he is quoting and get a full grasp of the surrounding concept the verse(s). Again, here is the portion of the verse that you seem to be overlooking; "Stop becoming unevenly yoked with unbelievers...". A friendship does not necessarily 'yoke' you to someone. Also, this verse teaches against the situation were believers are UNEVENLY yoked to unbelievers.
Next, look at the Tanach passages Paul quotes in vs 16-18. He quotes, Leviticus 6:16 Lev 26:12; Ezekiel 37:27, 6:18; Isa 52:11; Ezek 20:34, 41. These verses are about keeping The Commandments of Torah and living a holy lifestyle that pleases G-d. Clearly, based on what Paul quotes, we know that he is giving a teaching that tells us not to be yoked to unbelievers in a way that leads us to abandon our morals. Again, it's not a prohibition against having unbelievers as friends, it's a prohibition against being joined to them in a way that is unequal and will lead us into sin. He is saying that we have different standards we have to live by than non-believers, so we must guard against getting into a type of relationship that puts at a disadvantage based on our moral commitments, or leads us to break our moral commitments.
Keep searching these questions out, Bfoali. You are on the right track with sincere open investigation. Just remember, follow those quotes back to the Tanach. Paul frequently uses a single verse that he quotes to draw the readers attention to an entire chapter, or an entire Torah concept.
I have to agree with you one hundred percent on most of what you said. I do not think that the writing of Paul demanded Christians to seclude themselves from the rest of the world, but rather Paul did not want the followers of Jesus (in that context the early Christian churches) to engage in friendships with unbelievers because that might lead into sin or quite possibly disbelief. That was my interpretation of the verse after I read the commentaries and understood how modern day Christians interpret this verse. The bible speaks of loving your neighbours, praying for those who persecute you, so when I first encountered the verse I was quite bewildered and confused hence why I went to bible commentaries ( I also agree that the bible is quite explanatory within its own right and commentaries do help, but are not needed in quite the way that I need a commentary for the help of understanding the Quran) to get a better understanding (Which I did). There are some questions I would like to ask you but I think I can contain myself for now.
"Paul did not want the followers of Jesus (in that context the early Christian churches) to engage in friendships with unbelievers because that might lead into sin or quite possibly disbelief."
I wouldn't go so far as to say he taught against friendship with unbelievers in the general sense. Rather, he taught against being 'unequally yoked' in relationships to unbelievers. There is a big difference between me being your friend, and me being yoked to you [Again, keep the agricultural metaphor in mind. Think of cattle attached by a yoke around the neck and sharing a responsibility of pulling a plow together]. This is why I mentioned the primary issues this would impact would be marriage and business partnerships. In both those cases you are clearly yoked together. Next, there would be friendships where you share some sort of binding obligations together, and it could result in the believer being in a disadvantaged position due to the inequity of morals and behaviors the two would have. And finally, if you have a friendship that is leading you into sin, this would also fall under this teaching. I think if the friendship can actually lead you into sin, then that in itself might be proof that you are 'unequally yoked' as Paul mentions.
You've done a very good job at exegesis of the text, in that you realized that you needed to make sure the ambiguous/unclear passage isn't interpreted in a way that causes it to be a contradiction of the clear verses.
Also of interest to you on this topic, you might want to refer to the quotes in the Gospels where Yeshua says, "My burden is easy, My yoke is light". This is a good metaphor to understand in order to get the right meaning of several passages. Actually, thanks for drawing my attention to it again :-)
Feel free to ask, and I will do my best to answer as I am able, or at least point you in the right direction. You can also reach me at my gmail account if you prefer.
Your explanation is very good Sepher Shalom.I never thought Paul had in mind the Hebrew Scriptures.You sure know alot more than I or the NT commentators.I have learned alot from this blog.And I thought I already knew everything.Several times in the past I doubted if the NT was true,but out of a habit of just staying and researching,I decided to stay.And several weeks or months later new info,altogether unexpected,would be discovered that answered my doubt.That's why I give info,not to show off,but because another might not know...and it does make a difference.
Brother Sepher saide: «Clearly, based on what Paul quotes, we know that he is giving a teaching that tells us not to be yoked to unbelievers in a way that leads us to abandon our morals»...
precisely: do nott admitt thate your friendshipp (tahte is accepted and encoraged eben bie Paul) with non-beliebers make you accept theire moral or social paterns, and, eben less, import them to the structure off the Christian communities...
thankes Sepher... sometimes my english does nott allow me to be bery clear...
Thanks minoria. Glad I could be of some help. There are a few small things in this world that our L-rd has allowed me to understand, and I'm just happy when I can talk about it, and hear back from the others around here that have been given understanding of the things I haven't.
Keep those sources and comments coming! :-)
Fernando said: "thankes Sepher... sometimes my english does nott allow me to be bery clear..."
No, you are doing very well. Just keep at it. Anyone that actually wants to hear what you have to say, can follow your comments.
Post a Comment