or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Nightcrawler

Maybe, who knows, but if there comes a new revelation or other endtimes-things, we will see it. Until then what's wrong in trying to follow the current revelation we have now?
Yes, a lot of current rulings in this regard were done unfairly and without the right requirements.Of course some are false or weak, but there are also some valid ones.The real question is why should this ruling be ignored, just because the western world has no rulings regarding adultery, anymore? Is it again a question of imitation, assimilation? There is a death-punishment for murder and adultery for married people, one can discuss how the death-punishment be executed,...
We as muslims should become selfaware, selfconscious and confident enough to develop ourselves without giving in to western assimilation and to think "these islamic rulings might let us look backward to the west"... I think headscarfes are a quranic ruling and contemplated by hadiths, the question if that islamic ruling can be abrogated for our times can be discussed, but it should be within our islamic communities and for their good and not to please western audiences and...
Indeed, four witnesses are necessary or the ones committing it confess it four times.Here are some referenced: http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c...m/017.smt.htmlThe application of the stoning-ruling is certainly not fair or correct in saudi Arabia, pakistan and iran... stonings are done where lashings would have been the right decision, and sometimes the four witnesses nor the four confessions are there and sometimes only the woman gets punished... That's hardly a...
Stoning people is not a quranic ruling, in the quran the punishment for adultery is lashings for both, male and female. In hadiths though the prophet Muhammad ordered both punishments, lashings in cases where the adulterers were not married yet, and stoning when the respective adulterer was married. Regardless of what punishment, it was always the way to punish both adulterers, and not only the woman. In the case of a married man for example adultering with an unmarried...
If the motive is assimilation to the western world, then it's not a good thing. If the motive were a genuine interest in updating knowledge I don't see a problem, but in this case of headcovering there is no motive besides the assimilation-pressure.
Still don't get what corner they supposedly have painted themselves into? Do you want to say that because back then there were not detailed rulings regarding marriage, we should therefore also do without these rulings? Rulings can change in time, back then incest-relations were tolerated and encouraged and given the absence of options understandably but that does not mean that we should act the same today, the commandments since Moses are legitimate despite different...
Not only the christians, the jews as well, and the muslims, too. During the early times they tried to be like the people of the book, to differentiate themselves from the polytheists, they prayed in direction of Jerusalem and the women tried to dress more modest like the christian and jewish women were. God then revealed a verse to detail things a bit, ordering the muslim women to use their "khumur" (headcoverings) they were already using to cover their necks and chests as...
Good question, I don't know when exactly they started with the ritual of marriage, but what's your point?The thought of incest makes you feel all dirty, huh?
That's intellectually weak don't you think? If Adam and Eve were the only two humans then there obviously were no need for any declarations or pledges, there would be no other women and men that the two could practice adultery with. Likewise with Cain and his wife, as far as I remember the genesis-account claimed long lifes for Adam and Eve, multiple hundred of years, and dozens and dozens of children born during it . Enough to provide wifes for Cain, sure it's incest...
New Posts  All Forums: