Every Word, Every Letter in the Quran is up for Criticism

[Sahar]

This one is seriously disturbing as it defends Islamic practice of women wearing modest clothing as a means to prevent rape---promoting a view is that women are at fault for being raped.
Islamic Punishment for Rape - IslamonLine.net - Ask The Scholar

And seriously disturbing as it defends early marriage and the Islamic prohibition of Alcohol and drugs as means to prevent rape. This is really disturbing.

I don't see anything wrong with the article.

 

[kai]

And seriously disturbing as it defends early marriage and the Islamic prohibition of Alcohol and drugs as means to prevent rape. This is really disturbing.

I don't see anything wrong with the article.

The punishment for rape in Islam is the same as the punishment for zina (adultery or fornication), which is stoning if the perpetrator is married, and one hundred lashes and banishment for one year if he is not married.

The scholars are unanimously agreed that the rapist is to be subjected to the hadd punishment if there is clear evidence against him that he deserves the hadd punishment, or if he admits to that. Otherwise, he is to be punished (that is, if there is no proof that the hadd punishment for zina may be carried out against him because he does not confess and there are not four witnesses, then the judge may punish him and stipulate a punishment that will deter him and others like him). There is no punishment for the woman if it is true that he forced her and overpowered her. (Al-Istidhkaar, 7/146).
​

In addition, the rapist is subject to the hadd punishment for zina, even if the rape was not carried out at knifepoint or gunpoint. If the use of a weapon was threatened, then he is a muharib, and is to be subjected to the hadd punishment described in the verse in which Allah says (The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter) (Al-Ma’idah 5:33).
So the judge has the choice of the four punishments mentioned in this verse and may choose whichever he thinks is most suitable to attain the objective, which is to spread peace and security in society, and ward off evildoers and aggressors.

Nothing wrong in that?

 

[tariqkhwaja]

at the risk of repeating myself, how about it?

Yeah thanks for reminding me. I had forgotten about this one too.
I got employed and haven't posted replies in a long time (with the exception of yesterday). Bear with me if you think I have not disappointed in the past. Thanks.

 

[Sahar]

The punishment for rape in Islam is the same as the punishment for zina (adultery or fornication), which is stoning if the perpetrator is married, and one hundred lashes and banishment for one year if he is not married.

The scholars are unanimously agreed that the rapist is to be subjected to the hadd punishment if there is clear evidence against him that he deserves the hadd punishment, or if he admits to that. Otherwise, he is to be punished (that is, if there is no proof that the hadd punishment for zina may be carried out against him because he does not confess and there are not four witnesses, then the judge may punish him and stipulate a punishment that will deter him and others like him). There is no punishment for the woman if it is true that he forced her and overpowered her. (Al-Istidhkaar, 7/146).
​

In addition, the rapist is subject to the hadd punishment for zina, even if the rape was not carried out at knifepoint or gunpoint. If the use of a weapon was threatened, then he is a muharib, and is to be subjected to the hadd punishment described in the verse in which Allah says (The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter) (Al-Ma’idah 5:33).
So the judge has the choice of the four punishments mentioned in this verse and may choose whichever he thinks is most suitable to attain the objective, which is to spread peace and security in society, and ward off evildoers and aggressors.

Nothing wrong in that?

Nothing wrong.

 

[kai]

Nothing wrong.

well i hope they use someone qualified to do the amputations , and stoning, wow! how medieval. you surprise me not4me, you train to save lives ,yet agree to such barbaric penalties.

i personally do not agree with the death penalty full stop, i do not believe it should be applied for rape and stoning is barbaric and inhumane, as for amputations ,what the heck is this its 2008 not the dark ages.

 

[TashaN]

The punishment for rape in Islam is the same as the punishment for zina (adultery or fornication), which is stoning if the perpetrator is married, and one hundred lashes and banishment for one year if he is not married.

The scholars are unanimously agreed that the rapist is to be subjected to the hadd punishment if there is clear evidence against him that he deserves the hadd punishment, or if he admits to that. Otherwise, he is to be punished (that is, if there is no proof that the hadd punishment for zina may be carried out against him because he does not confess and there are not four witnesses, then the judge may punish him and stipulate a punishment that will deter him and others like him). There is no punishment for the woman if it is true that he forced her and overpowered her. (Al-Istidhkaar, 7/146).
​

In addition, the rapist is subject to the hadd punishment for zina, even if the rape was not carried out at knifepoint or gunpoint. If the use of a weapon was threatened, then he is a muharib, and is to be subjected to the hadd punishment described in the verse in which Allah says (The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter) (Al-Ma’idah 5:33).
So the judge has the choice of the four punishments mentioned in this verse and may choose whichever he thinks is most suitable to attain the objective, which is to spread peace and security in society, and ward off evildoers and aggressors.

Nothing wrong in that?

What's wrong with that?

 

[kai]

What's wrong with that?

unless i am leading myself into a corner with a trick question , whats right with it?

 

[TashaN]

unless i am leading myself into a corner with a trick question , whats right with it?

I asked you first.

 

[kai]

I asked you first.

yes but your very tricky , and i asked you because you know and i dont so whats right with it

 

[TashaN]

yes but your very tricky , and i asked you because you know and i dont so whats right with it

To me, it's as good as any other islamic ruling. When someone breaks the law, should be punished, so simple.

Don't tell me it's just another "i'm against harsh and death penalty" argument thing?

If that's the case, then you have to understand that we are applying divine law, not man made law. That's why the crime rate is less in the countries which apply islamic rulings. The whole pakage, not to apply some rules and ignore others.

 

[kai]

To me, it's as good as any other islamic ruling. When someone breaks the law, should be punished, so simple. OK

Don't tell me it's just another "i'm against harsh and death penalty" argument thing? Yes it is of course it is

If that's the case, then you have to understand that we are applying divine law, not man made law. That's why the crime rate is less in the countries which apply islamic rulings. The whole pakage, not to apply some rules and ignore others.

oh i forgot its devine law, so you are quite happy to stone people for adultery and cut off hands and feet on opposite sides , crime rates were low in Soviet Russia too and that wasnt devine law that was a similar terrifying law. like a bullet in the back of the head .

but OK if god said its OK to do this who am i to dissagree, thank heavens i live an my country thats all i can say.

 

[Sahar]

well i hope they use someone qualified to do the amputations , and stoning, wow! how medieval. you surprise me not4me, you train to save lives ,yet agree to such barbaric penalties.

i personally do not agree with the death penalty full stop, i do not believe it should be applied for rape and stoning is barbaric and inhumane, as for amputations ,what the heck is this its 2008 not the dark ages.

Don't confuse things and don't talk about the dark ages when it comes to Islam. There isn't a religion that founded one of the greatest civilizations like Islam.
The barbaric is the rape, abuse...etc. The last thing I would think of is the life of the criminal. If it was possible to see the rapist executed twice, I wouldn't mind.
And when the severity of the penalty matches with atrociousness of the crime, it's barbaric. The penalties are not supposed to be something cool and easy but something hard and harsh that should terrify and deter those whose conscience is dead.
Something like stoning, we read now different opinions about it. Some say it's hadd and cann't be changed. Others say it's not hadd and it's optional for the government to apply it or not. Others refuse it completely and claim it's alien to the religion. Of course stoning is very severe and vigorous and something I wouldn't enjoy hearing about. But it's not something is going to happen every day even if we agreed it's hadd. It's application would be rare just like throughout the Islamic history.
If we are talking about the current time, I won't like to see it applied in the current status of the Muslim societies and it's not in the first place.
Some of the hudud is applied and some is not and most of the Muslim societies don't apply hudud.

 

[kai]

Don't confuse things and don't talk about the dark ages when it comes to Islam. why not? There isn't a religion that founded one of the greatest civilizations like Islam. I agree its military conquests are as legendary as its greatest generals
The barbaric is the rape, abuse...etc. The last thing I would think of is the life of the criminal. If it was possible to see the rapist executed twice, I wouldn't mind. So as a Doctor you wont be treating any criminals?
And when the severity of the penalty matches with atrociousness of the crime, it's barbaric. The penalties are not supposed to be something cool and easy but something hard and harsh that should terrify and deter those whose conscious is dead. Terrifying is right
Something like stoning, we read now different opinions about it. Some say it's hadd and cann't be changed. Others say it's not hadd and it's optional for the government to apply it or not. Others refuse it completely and claim it's alien to the religion. Of course stoning is very severe and vigorous and something I wouldn't enjoy hearing about. But it's not something is going to happen every day even if we agreed it's hadd. one day is enough for me It's application would be rare just like throughout the Islamic history.
If we are talking about the current time, I won't like to see it applied in the current status of the Muslim societies and it's not in the first place.
Some of the hudud is applied and some is not and most of the Muslim societies don't apply hudud.

good for them!

 

[Sahar]

So as a Doctor you wont be treating any criminals?

You insist on confusing things. It's not my job to catch the criminals, punish them...etc. Every one is in his position. Treating the ill doesn't mean canceling the laws pf punishments.

 

[d3vaLL]

I can't see how love can exist in a place like that. Relatives and friends being killed left and right by relatives and friends for the smallest misdeeds. There is no forgiveness. How does this inspire anything but anger and hatred. If the Qu'ran is perfect, then almost every example personified has been a complete failure. In my heart of hearts, I see it inspiring some of the most ugliest and putrid thing in this world. If God wrote words to inspire man to do his wrath for him, then I will burn in hell for eternity in my righteous disgust. I fear the heart God gave me more than the body. Truly sickening what is condoned.

 

[Sahar]

I can't see how love can exist in a place like that. Relatives and friends being killed left and right by relatives and friends for the smallest misdeeds. There is no forgiveness.

What are you talking about?!!

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Assalamualaikum.

For unlike the Bible the Quran is not recordings of Jesus. The status of the Gospels is exactly that of the Hadith. Both are recordings of their holy founder as written down from memory by the followers of their religions. The Gospels are traditions and actions of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him). The Hadith are traditions and actions of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Both created decades after the founder's advent. Both subject to criticism of authenticity if from nothing else, mere human error.

But every letter in the Quran starting from the B of Bismillah to the S of Naas, EVERY LETTER is the word of God. And, therefore, for any non-believer, every single word is up for criticism. Because if the Quran is the Word of God and if it is protected in its exact revealed form and if God has said that the Quran is the last revealed scripture of God then it must withstand and counter and successfully counter all and any criticism waged at it. But not only that.

Any criticism thrown at the Quran might be countered by the Quran itself. And there is no need to browse through another book. That is the completeness of the Quran. But not only that.

The further one criticizes the Quran the further one stands to be astounded by its perfection. Just as students question what their science teachers teach them. And the more they question the more astounded they are at the resolution of their queries. In the same way, just like the Act of God (science), the Word of God (Quran) should be able to stand the same tests if it is truly the Word of God from first letter to last letter.

It is with this background that I ask everyone to kindly study the Quran and put forth whatever criticism they have of it. Honesty is the requirement.

Thank you Tashan for asking the administrators to create this Quranic Debate forum. I did not notice it until you pointed it out. And that to the administrators too.

Why comment on something that would condemn me hell if I disagree? Seems kinda pointless to me.

 

[tariqkhwaja]

Why comment on something that would condemn me hell if I disagree? Seems kinda pointless to me.

The Quran claims that honesty is the requirement. If you are rational and honest and in all honesty disagree because of honest human error ... you will surely not go to hell. The God of Islam is not that ruthless. In fact He is kinder to you than your mother.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

The Quran claims that honesty is the requirement. If you are rational and honest and in all honesty disagree because of honest human error ... you will surely not go to hell. The God of Islam is not that ruthless. In fact He is kinder to you than your mother.

So there's no hell? The point is (a) any God that would have a hell cannot be very confident in the power of his love to prevail over evil and (b) such a God would be anthropomorphic--reflecting the culture and mindset of barbarians.

 

[darkendless]

The Quran claims that honesty is the requirement. If you are rational and honest and in all honesty disagree because of honest human error ... you will surely not go to hell. The God of Islam is not that ruthless. In fact He is kinder to you than your mother.

That is a reasonable claim to make but does one not have to sumbit to Islam and accept Allah?
Honesty goes a long way to the betterment of society, sadly i doubt there will ever be an improvment there, we are a greedy world.