In Kerala, Inter-Faith Couple Lives in Fear, Plans to Request Chief Minister For Help

[Armstrong]

I've already posted that the god doesnt judge a person by the number of prayers he offers or the number of verses he knows but by his deeds. I'm reposting what I had posted a while back

You are taking those verses completely out of context; yes God judges people on the basis of your deeds thats precisely why no one really knows whether a said person would go to heaven or hell (if they are what they're thought to be in the traditional sense of those words) irrespective of their faith.

But he also judges them on the basis of monotheistic belief.

And the complete verse you quoted (16:97) comes from Chapter 16 of the Koran where Until verse 88, the sura is directed at the polytheists; from verse 90 on wards it teaches the Muslims in various ways. Verse 89 connects the two parts by naming the Prophet as witness to the believers and disbelievers of his community. (pg.166, Oxford World's Classics - the Quran, M.A.S. Abdel Haleem)

Those aforementioned verses are not addressing Non Muslims but Muslims and is not exclusive of the monotheistic belief and the religious practices that go with it.

If one reads the entire chapter which part is dealt with whom becomes somewhat evident because different groups of people are being addressed in different parts.

 

[Levina]

You are taking those verses completely out of context; yes God judges people on the basis of your deeds thats precisely why no one really knows whether a said person would go to heaven or hell (if they are what they're thought to be in the traditional sense of those words) irrespective of their faith.

But he also judges them on the basis of monotheistic belief.

And the complete verse you quoted (16:97) comes from Chapter 16 of the Koran where Until verse 88, the sura is directed at the polytheists; from verse 90 on wards it teaches the Muslims in various ways. Verse 89 connects the two parts by naming the Prophet as witness to the believers and disbelievers of his community. (pg.166, Oxford World's Classics - the Quran, M.A.S. Abdel Haleem)

Those aforementioned verses are not addressing Non Muslims but Muslims and is not exclusive of the monotheistic belief and the religious practices that go with it.

If one reads the entire chapter which part is dealt with whom becomes somewhat evident because different groups of people are being addressed in different parts.

I've lots to say...nothing against islam but about its interpretations but I'm sure if i post it here then it might hurt a few.
I've already said that god before everything else judges you by your deeds and not by anything else. He would not care if you're a monotheist or polytheist as long as you're a good human.
I think I've said enough.

 

[Armstrong]

I've lots to say...nothing against islam but about its interpretations but I'm sure if i post it here then it might hurt a few.
I've already said that god before everything else judges you by your deeds and not by anything else. He would not care if you're a monotheist or polytheist as long as you're a good human.
I think I've said enough.

I don't think God, as Islam sees Him to be, agrees with you !

Its both good deeds and monotheism that counts which is not to say that monotheism is a get-out-of-jail card or that good deeds don't count. There are plenty of Prophetic traditions out there (unless I'm mistaken) which talk about Believers being sent to hell while Non Believers being admitted to heaven.

Monotheism, in Islam, has more of a philosophical connotation as opposed to one that divides people between heaven and hell.

If only you could read Urdu....the above has been best captured by Iqbal in his poetry !

But we digress; I thought we were talking about inter-religious marriage !

 

[Levina]

I don't think God, as Islam sees Him to be, agrees with you !

Its both good deeds and monotheism that counts which is not to say that monotheism is a get-out-of-jail card or that good deeds don't count. There are plenty of Prophetic traditions out there (unless I'm mistaken) which talk about Believers being sent to hell while Non Believers being admitted to heaven.

But we digress; I thought we were talking about inter-religious marriage !

Nope we are still on topic that Islam doesnt allow a polytheist to marry a muslim woman.
And I've already explained the reason why and how that interpretation came into being.But then I guess you did not read it.

 

[Armstrong]

Nope we are still on topic that Islam doesnt allow a polytheist to marry a muslim woman.
And I've already explained the reason why and how that interpretation came into being.But then I guess you did not read it.

Islam doesn't allow either a man or a woman to marry a polytheist !

If its from the People of the Book and here 'monotheism' or something like it, is the touchstone....thats where the grey area is !

And I added some more to my post; you didn't read that !

 

[SarthakGanguly]

It was very much similar to 'expulsion and massacre of Kashmiri pandits in 90's''...This will bound to happen when you consider RELIGIOUS identity more than LINGUISTIC/ETHNICAL identity...Mappila jihadis killed their own Malayalam speaking Hindus(10,000) for religion.....

Yeah read that. Even Christians were also not spared. But our school history books washed it clean. Graduation level history however does explore the details more objectively. I don't like religion much personally.

 

[Levina]

Islam doesn't allow either a man or a woman to marry a polytheist !

If its from the People of the Book and here 'monotheism' or something like it, is the touchstone....thats where the grey area is !

And I added some more to my post; you didn't read that !

Armstrong there's no point continuing on this topic because you've not understood what I said in my first post.I had given you my post (which was a reply to Oscar's post) to read.
And you have not understood anything from it or may be you have not read it at all.

You're being bookish by literally translating it without understanding the deeper hidden meanings...thats all I can say.
I dont want to continue on this topic...because i dont think you will understand it...it would be like banging my head against a wall.So lil bro i spare you Lol

 

[Armstrong]

Armstrong there's no point continuing on this topic because you've not understood what I said in my first post.I had given you my post (which was a reply to Oscar's post) to read.
And you have not understood anything from it or may be you have not read it at all.

You're being bookish by literally translating it without understanding the deeper hidden meanings...thats all I can say.
I dont want to continue on this topic...because i dont think you will understand it...it would be like banging my head against a wall.So lil bro i spare you Lol

Did you just call me stoooooopid !

You're going to tell me the esoteric meaning of my own religion !

Okay wait let me go and check what you actually wrote; it was so long that I skipped it !

 

[Levina]

Did you just call me stoooooopid !

You're going to tell me the esoteric meaning of my own religion !

Okay wait let me go and check what you actually wrote; it was so long that I skipped it !

dafa ho ja Amii...
(i really want to put that H somewhere so that amii doesnt sound like a gal's name )
I usually dont make long posts so when I make one I make sure that ppl read it well before they debate.I like my students doing their homework.

 

[Jzaib]

let the poor guys have live their life. many indian muslims are just muslims by name . they dont follow the religion. As it was told to me on PDF many times. So why put restriction on muslims who are just muslims bcoz they are born in a muslim house.

 

[Armstrong]

dafa ho ja Amii...
(i really want to put that H somewhere so that amii doesnt sound like a gal's name )
I usually dont make long posts so when I make one I make sure that ppl read it well before they debate.I like my students doing their homework.

I read the post; I'm not impressed !

Its revisionism nothing more; those verses were revealed at the time of the Treaty of Hudaibya to define the relations between Muslims and Non Muslims but there is nothing to suggest in the rest of the Koran, in the rest of the same Chapter, in Prophetic Traditions or Historical Evidence from those times (to the best of my knowledge) that those injunctions were for that particular period and that period alone. There is, however, quite a bit to suggest otherwise.

Nowhere in the article did the lady mention any Prophetic Tradition because she probably knows that they go against her thesis and this is precisely the reason why Islam isn't just the Koran, its the Koran and the Prophetic Traditions. You have to understand that for Muslims the Koran is the word of God while the Prophetic Traditions are its interpretations; without the twain the other can't be understood which is exactly why both the Koran and the Prophetic Traditions form the basis for any and every mainstream School of Jurisprudence in Islam.

And this is coming from a lapsed Koranist - Me !

 

[Levina]

I read the post; I'm not impressed !

Its revisionism nothing more; those verses were revealed at the time of the Treaty of Hudaibya to define the relations between Muslims and Non Muslims but there is nothing to suggest in the rest of the Koran, in the rest of the same Chapter, in Prophetic Traditions or Historical Evidence from those times (to the best of my knowledge) that those injunctions were for that particular period and that period alone. There is, however, quite a bit to suggest otherwise.

Nowhere in the article did the lady mention any Prophetic Tradition because she probably knows that they go against her thesis and this is precisely the reason why Islam isn't just the Koran, its the Koran and the Prophetic Traditions.

And this is coming from a lapsed Koranist - Me !

which lady???

Open my post #333 on this page and read.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

statement 1

statement 2
You're contradicting yourself Zarvan Bhai.
The moment you said YES you meant she had the right to be with a man who respects her more irrespective of his religion.And thats what matters.

No. He is not contradicting himself. In Islam this marriage is illegitimate. Since Shariah is not enforced in India, this is legally fine. Don't try finding legitimacy in religion.

Boycott should be done by Muslims and most Muslims don't like this so cut the crap

LOL. Muslims should boycott, muslims should fight, do this do that... blah blah blah.
The Law of the Land is different. Everyone should deal with it. Or spend some time in jail.

For a reality check... check any Indian printed newspaper and go to the classifields section. You will find plenty of 'Muslim brides looking for prospective grooms, religion no bar'. That should shatter your illusions. Far more Muslims marry non Muslims simply due to statistical reasons. Nobody cares.

 

[Armstrong]

which lady???

Open my post #333 on this page and read.

I thought you were referring to that earlier post in which you'd quoted a lady by the name of Asma....!

About post #333 - I thought I did comment on that in posts #331 and #334 !

 

[SrNair]

Yes but should be a Muslim and if she marries a non Muslim and as this girl is living in non Muslim country they just needs to boycott her completely and her family needs to boycott her too as long as she stays with this man sorry but according to Islam this marriage never took place and children will be considered illegitimate.

But the men from Muslim community can marry any other non muslims and can live with her with or without conversion.
What a nice law.
But in India this is not acceptable.Anshida is an Indian citizen and she has her own freedom ,for marriage and also for education.Other Muslim members should stay away from her.In this democratic nation noone can block her personal freedom not even Courts without any reason.