Hi all

(cont to MzzDemeanor)

" 'awrah" may be more than stated. However, I didn't know the word, so I looked it up.

You'd better contact the Encyclopaedia of Islam to tell them they're wrong. They say, & I quote:
" 'awrah as pudendum, that is 'the external genitals, especially of the female. [Latin: pudendum (literally) a thing to be ashamed of.]

I learnt Latin at school, so I understood the aforementioned word. ["puellas nudas videre amo" = "I like to look at nude women" - appropriate in the circumstances, but not my thinking.]

Convert you from what? Atheism? Secular Humanism? What?

Hillsong's probably one of the most 'welcoming' of churches within Christendom. They're interested in "souls", & because of their "healing" & "wealth creation" ministries they're most affable. However, Scripture says:
"For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist." 2 John 1:7.

'Sensing' something that 'mocked' Christ, may have made them suspicious.

You state that "Somewhere in Genesis (it) states adulteress women should be killed ..". It isn't in Genesis. It's Leviticus 20:10. HOWEVER, just like the other 200-odd Levitical Laws instituted by Yahweh for Jews, they were superseded, by the New Covenant of Christ for Christians. Adultery, under Christ is grounds for divorce - not Judaic stoning.

Meanwhile, under Sharia law, & with 4-witnesses the Qur'an (Surah 4:15) requires that the woman be incarcerated until she dies. Surah 33:30 suggests "double punishment".

Men's punishment isn't identical. They're probably exonerated under the prejudicial court system, or through "mutah" (temporary marriage), able to avoid the charge. Refer Surah 4:16 which says:
"If two men among you commit a lewd act, punish them both. If they repent & mend their ways, let them be. Allah is forgiving & merciful." and,
Mohammad taught: "If a man & a woman agree (to temporarily marry), their marriage should last for three nights, & if they like can continue.". Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol 7 Hadith 52. ....

...(t.b.c.)

Cheers all

Dear Dawood...
well it took off and flew right over your head like a migrating bird eh i.e. the point.

THE POINT.. was made not by 'me' but by Sheikh Hamza Yusuf !

It was HIS statement..not mine. I'm just the reporter mate.
He made the point that the flavor/tone/wording of the said 'pre-nagging' revelations, was distinctly MALE in flavor IN SUCH A WAY that it was noticed by females of the day, who complained about it.
The tone/flavor of the revelations after the 'nag' changed.

Now.. I have to admit, I don't have a clue about this apart from what this leading Islamic scholar mentioned. But then again...do I need to ? If he himself can admit it, why should I doubt it ? Further, why in the world would I accept your statements as anything other than ducking and weaving ? :)

Seriously ... I've read further since last night on a number of Islamic sites on the issue of 'PLEASURE MARRAIGE'.

Quran 4.24 (I won't quote it) was used in the days of Mohammed who apparently (according to Sunni Sources as well as Shia) PRACTICED this.. the difference between these traditions is "Did he later ban it" ? Sunni say yes, Shia say no.

So.. here is the classic example of how Islam first condemns something, then in the next breath justifies it, by 're-badging' it.

From that ayat:

1/ You can have pleasure "marraige" (which is purely for SEX)
2/ You must not do it for LUST' (HUH ?)
3/ You must PAY the girl from your property.(adjusted dower)

Now.. how in the world can you say "its not about lust" when its just for a few days or a night or whatever..? and you go your separate ways after it all ! Further, it suggests you 'PAY' her for the pleasure... "Whatever benefit you gained from her"....

This my, friend in any other language or culture is called PROSTITUTION. The only slight difference is that in this case the hooker actually is supposed to 'like' the man.

Hi all

(continuation of 20/3 to MzzDemeanor)

Your comment that China has the largest Muslim population. I'm told Indonesia - Keysar TRAD agrees (publicly on TV 10/5/2004). If it's China, then I wouldn't be publicising it - China is most intolerant of Muslims. [My eldest son lives in mainland China with his Chinese wife. Communists despise Muslims.]

Your quote: "Mohammed avoided bloodshed ... in battle 2 1/2 TOTAL".

He is recorded as leading the following battles:

1. early Mecca caravan raids;

2. Battle of Badr (624) - Qurayah defeated the Muslims;

3. Battle of Ulud (625) - Muslims defeated;

4. Siege of Bani Nazir (626) - Jews defeated;

5. Battle of the Trench/Ditch (627) - Median defeated the Meccans;

6. Massacre of the Bani Qurayza (627);

7. Conquest of Khaybar (629) - Jews slaughtered. Muhammad despatched letters & messengers;

8. Conquest of Mecca (630);

9. Battle of Hunain & Taif;

10. Battle of Tabuk.

Other texts suggest Muhammad participated in 26-battles. That's more than 2.

Muhammad ran out of time to lead more wars - he was murdered by a Jewish maid (8/6/632AD).

You claim my quotes are weak!? They are directly from the 'approved' Qur'an, authorised by Imam Taj Eldine EL-HILALY & the "sahih" (correct) & "muwatah" (narrated similarly by many) Ahadith of Moslem & Bukhari.

Are you saying that Sheikh EL-HILALY, Keysar TRAD, & others whom I know, & their referrals helping my 'study' of Islam, are mis-informed or deliberately misguiding me? Additionally, I study independently with other Islamic scholars - many are Middle Eastern so have a good command of Arabic. I also understand some of it.
(16/3/06)

SandiM (post 3:44:51 PM 15/3/06)

Thank you for the references & the support.

I am really pleased that Irfan has made a stance against "radical Islam", but it is important that people like MzzDemeanor aren't given false information.
(16/3/06)

carno (post 4:48:13 PM 15/3/06)

Keep posting! You are fair & unbiased.

Isn't it interesting though, that many of the Atheist "mass murderers" used religious text to justify their atrocities. They simply mis-quoted & quoted in isolation.
(16/3/06)

Cheers all

Hi all

BOAZ_David (post 10:04:24 PM 15/3/06)

You, too, noticed MzzDemeanor's comment that she's a politician. I almost pretended I didn't notice - I didn't intend asking.

She can't be a NSW or Federal politician - there are only 2 (to my knowledge). One is Victoria's Adem SOLMUREK. I suspect that MzzDemeanor might be a Local Government politician?.

Interestingly the ALP seems to attract the largest vote from Muslims in NSW. Irfan stood for Liberal Party pre-selection.

Ain't politics interesting?
(16/3/06)

Irfan (post 12:10:17 AM 16/3/06)

There are some who speak with venom - from all sides. I don't see that from many - some, yes.

I am disappointed that you see all Qur'anic quotes made by non-Muslims as "misquoting verses". The Qur'an creates that perspective. It says of itself:

"If we abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, we will replace it by a better one or similar one. Did you not know that Allah has power over all these things?" Surah 2:106.

As you know, that is “An-Nasekh wa Al-Mansoukh” (the abrogating & abrogated text).

That's why I'm fearful for Muslim's salvation. If Allah is "all-knowing" yet constantly changes his mind, then how can Allah be all-knowing? Surely if he knew what was, is & would be (omniscient), then he would have gotten it correct ONCE - & once only.

How can we thereafter trust his Sharia laws? [And that's the purpose of this post! - understanding Sharia from a Sufi perspective.] If we examine Islam through Sufism, & Sufism still uses the Qur'an, Sunna & Hadith, then Qur'anic text is still relevant. I trust that Sufism does use them? If I'm wrong please advise.

Your comment: "But despite all the damage you (the dissenting postees) cause ... Your frequent posts mean that my articles perhaps generate the most comments of any contributor to this site. .. I want to reach a double century ..".

I hope that you aren't just seeking the notoriety of voluminous responses! ....

...(t.b.c.)

Cheers all

You don't know if it is a man or a woman under the cloak of a chudorra or hijab.

The head covering has nothing whatsoever about islam or being a muslim ,it was invented for a hot climate head covering nothing to do with religion but like buddhism which is a philosophy , not a spiritual belief system, has now been cunn ingly accepted as a religious neccesity.

What a lot of nonsense making issues over a head covering.

Alcohol too is a no, no for muslims except when no one is looking,people who work with them can vouch for their love of alcohol (not all)

Hi all

(continuation to Irfan from my 22/3/06 posting)

Irfan, I genuinely hope this post is successful, with both Muslims & non-Muslims contributing. I hope it generates better understanding - without hostility. But it won't if we aren't honest. Without honest there's no trust.

By the way, you're lagging! 67 posts in 6 days! Another post achieved 98. Most posts slow-down after the first week.
(16/3/06)

Irfan (post 2:42:44 AM 17/3/06)

I'm disappointed that you've also denigrated this post into an insult of personalities.

Your quote: ".. all you racist ..".
I don't recall anyone - with 1 exception - vilifying ethnicities.

I certainly haven't - one of my daughters-in-law is from mainland China. A beautiful lady. So, I can assume that you're not talking to me on this issue.

"pseudo-Christian"?
Well, again that can't be me. I'm faithful to my beliefs, following as best I can the Ten Commandments as expressed in the Sermon on the Mount of Beatitudes by Christ (Matt 5-7).

I also hear Christ's calling: "If anyone is ashamed of Me & My words in this adulterous & sinful world, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the Father's glory with the Holy Angels." Mark 8:38.

Through the Apostle Paul, we're also called to "Test all things. Hold forth all that is good. Reject evil." 1 Thessalonians 5:21. So, I must ask & seek to understand that which confuses me.

"pseudo-Australian"?
Hardly! Like yourself I have dedicated much of my life to seeking social & judicial justice. I've come to your defence on many occasions.

If what you've said recently is indicative of your "true self", then maybe your detractors were right?

"fruitcakes"?
We're all that occasionally. So, take a bow. I like fruitcake .. & chocolate.

You seem to be fixated on numerical posting success? Why? Do you get paid a 'bonus'?

Surely your aim ought to be to encourage honest dialogue. Hopefully, in the process we'll all come to understand each other better.
(17/3/06)

Cheers all