To think this absolutely is homophobic

[HuntIdeas]

Muslim families have successfully argued for Birmingham primary schools to stop the No Outsiders programme

"Morally we do not accept homosexuality as a valid sexual relationship to have. It's not about being homophobic... that's like saying, if you don't believe in Islam, you're Islamophobic."

AIBU to think:

1. This absolutely is a homophobic thing to say
2. There are plenty of places in the world where you would get stoned for stating you didn’t believe in Islam!

Hopefully this link works: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-47613578

Re: legal restrictions, I only became aware of this after Lee Rigby was killed and I was looking for an Islamic explanation of why that was impermissible in case anyone asked me about it. I found several videos on YouTube of UK imams condemning the act but none have an explanation of the Islamic ruling. One said that ‘now is not the right time’ but it would be discussed later and another mentioned legal restrictions on talking about it and said that he would either write to David Cameron about that or have a meeting with him, I don’t remember which. I’ve also noticed some scholars from abroad avoiding answering certain questions during q and a sessions in UK mosques.
So I don’t know if there is a defined policy about it but people definitely feel unsure what they can and can’t say.
Which is a shame because if it’s not allowed to discuss some Islamic rulings then it’s very difficult to convince anyone who is thinking of getting involved in violence/terrorism that what they are doing is wrong in Islam.

With regards to the revelation and writing down of the Qur'an:
The Qur'an was revealed gradually over many years to the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and he recited it to the people. Many of his companions memorised it and would recite it regularly. Some people who knew who to read and write also wrote it down. At that time in the Arabian peninsula the culture was more oral than written so many people were skilled at memorising but only a few could read and write.
Then all of the writings were gathered into one book and they were meticulously checked against other written copies and what had been memorised.
Every time that a new copy is made it is always checked so no mistakes can get in. A Western scholar, Adrian Brockett, concluded that the only explanation for how the Qur'an has been preserved without any differences between manuscripts over the years is that there was always a parallel transmission, both oral and written.

Stating gay relationships are equivalent is fact. I will start reporting your homophobic posts if you don’t stop.

Still waiting on an explanation on how sexuality can be wilfully changed.

There is no comparison with the New Testament. The differences between the four Gospels go beyond scribal errors, not to mention that there were originally many more gospels which never made it into the biblical canon, including some which were completely lost (e.g. the Gospel of the Ebionites) and which are only known about through references in the works of writers like Irenaeus and Epiphanius who would later be known as the Church Fathers.
When discussing the old manuscripts of the New Testament biblical scholar Dr Bart Ehrman stated 'There are more variations between our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament'.

No point Yennefer it will only be deleted.

I'm not going to say anything else about this issue as there is no point taking time to write posts just for them to be deleted. I will only come back to answer the question about Western scholars studying Islam, as well as any other issues that have been brought up that are not immediately related to the Birmingham protests. So please no-one ask me any more questions about that.

So you make an outrageous claim and make excuses to why you can't back up that claim.

People for being trying to change their sexuality for decades. If you've worked out how to, it seems like you should share it with the world.

I'm not making excuses. It's obvious that Nordic Star is upset by this discussion, and she has asked me to stop posting about it. MNHQ has just deleted one of my posts and I am sure if I answer your question it will get deleted too.
I would happily discuss it if I felt the discussion would be calm and unproblematic but I feel it isn't going that way. In real life, if things were getting heated and people were getting upset I wouldn't keep the discussion going so why do it on here?
Fwiw I'm not claiming at all to have come up with any easy solutions as I personally have no experience of these situations.

It would only be deleted if it breaks the forum rules.

It's not about whether you have an easy solution, it's about having a solution (If we assume that being gay is a problem to be solved, which it isn't). You're claiming to know how to do something that has never been done before.

I've checked the forum rules; some of them are subjective. Please respect my decision not to keep discussing this.

Can I quickly comment on the how laws fit into religion as I was taught (I am Christian)?

If you do something against the will of God, then you commit a sin. If you do something against the laws of your society, you commit a crime. If for example you murder someone, you commit both a sin and a crime. God will forgive your sin instantly if you truly repent, however, society will punish your crime according to the rules of that society. Is there a similar teaching in Islam Breeze?

I think it is dangerous to mix a) the laws, rules and constructs of society law with b) something as personal as religion and I think we should do our outmost to understand each other and not judge anyone based on anything.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-47692617
"The said the No Outsiders lessons use a book featuring two mothers and their child, and depicts them doing "normal things".

The idea is to show children how "all families are different."

"We are not teaching children about same sex couples in the sense of sexual relationships, what we do teach our children is that there are different families and that there are families with two mummies, two daddies."

I don't understand how someone could have a problem with this.

If someone would encourage their gay child to 'overcome' their sexuality I absolutely would judge them. It's damaging.

I wonder if parents were protesting because a children's book featured a mixed race couple, or a mixed faith couple, would people be as quick to preach understanding towards racist views?

Breeze I've never heard of these other gospels.

"I don't understand how someone could have a problem with this."

People can get funny about portraying things as "normal" though. It is one thing to simply inform children that there are people out there who are in polygamous relationships for example, but then if the kids are told that this is normal. valid etc etc, well those that do not agree may object.

It is a fine line between simply imparting information as to what goes on in the world with no hint of approval or disaproval of it, and to indeed impart a 'this is OK/not OK' sentiment.

I have a feeling that they will go beyond 'this happens' and go into 'and it is OK' territory.

Hence those that do not agree it is OK may object. To answer your question.

Hoover, you asked about the importance of scholarly knowledge in relation to alleged contradictions in the Qur'an, as well as whether Western scholars should be dismissed altogether.

Firstly, many people have made allegations that there are contradictions in the Qur'an, and scholarly knowledge is essential in order to refute these allegations effectively. For the average Muslim, if they have a misunderstanding about some verses of the Qur'an or don't understand how one verse relates to another, they will not see it as contradictory because they know that the Qur'an is the words of Allah and there can therefore be no contradiction, rather there is some deficiency in their own knowledge and understanding which they can rectify by consulting those who have more knowledge than them.
In terms of non-Muslims who allege contradictions in the Qur'an then this is based on ignorance of various types. Possibly the most common type of ignorance is lack of knowledge of the Arabic language which leads to misinterpretation.
I will give you an example of people who alleged that there was a contradiction between some verses referring to creation taking place over six days and other verses which they wrongly thought meant that the heavens and earth were created in eight days. This response was given by an Islamic scholar:

This is an issue which confuses some people, and some of them think that Allaah created the heavens and the earth in eight days as Allaah says in Soorah Fussilat (interpretation of the meaning):
“Say (O Muhammad): Do you verily disbelieve in Him Who created the earth in two Days? And you set up rivals (in worship) with Him? That is the Lord of the ‘Aalameen (mankind, jinn and all that exists).
He placed therein (i.e. the earth) firm mountains from above it, and He blessed it, and measured therein its sustenance (for its dwellers) in four Days equal (i.e. all these four ‘days’ were equal in the length of time) for all those who ask (about its creation).
Then He rose over (Istawa) towards the heaven when it was smoke, and said to it and to the earth: ‘Come both of you willingly or unwillingly.’ They both said: ‘We come willingly.’
Then He completed and finished from their creation (as) seven heavens in two Days and He made in each heaven its affair. And We adorned the nearest (lowest) heaven with lamps (stars) to be an adornment as well as to guard (from the devils by using them as missiles against the devils). Such is the Decree of Him, the All-Mighty, the All-Knower”
[Fussilat 41:9-12]
because this seems to contradict the other verse which says that He created them in six days.
This is a misunderstanding, and the answer to it is as follows:
There is no contradiction between the time period mentioned in these verses and the other verse which says that it was six days.
In these verses – from Soorah Fussilat – we see that Allaah is telling us that He “created the earth in two Days”.

Then He “placed therein (i.e. the earth) firm mountains from above it, and He blessed it, and measured therein its sustenance (for its dwellers)” in four days equal– i.e., in two days that were added to the two days in which He created the earth, so the total is four days. It does not say that the creation of the mountains and the measuring of the sustenance took four days.
Perhaps the confusion which is mentioned in the question stems from this, i.e., from thinking that the four days are added to the two days in which the earth was created, equaling six, and then adding the two days in which the heavens were created (“Then He completed and finished from their creation (as) seven heavens in two Days”) – making a total of eight days, not six days. But this confusion can be dispelled by dealing with this mistaken notion. So the earth was created in two days, and the mountains were created and the sustenance measured in two more days which makes a total of four, i.e., this took the other two days. Then the creation of the seven heavens took two days. So the total is six days of the Days of Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted.
The mufassireen commented on this fact which deals with the mistaken notion. Al-Qurtubi said:
“in four days” – this is like someone saying, “I set out from Basra to Baghdad in ten days and to Kufa in fifteen days, i.e., a total time of fifteen days.” (al-Jaami’ li Ahkaam al-Qur’aan, vol. 15, p. 343).
Al-Baghawi said: “in four days” means the creation of what is in the earth. The measuring of the sustenance was on Tuesday and Wednesday, which along with Sunday and Monday add up to four days. This is like saying “I married a woman yesterday and today I married two” – one of whom is the woman whom he married the day before.
Tafseer al-Baghawi, 7/165
Al-Zajjaaj said: “in four days” means two days added to the previous two days.
Al-Kashshaaf, vol. 3, p. 444
These verses – from Soorah Fussilat – confirm the other verse, which says that the creation of the heavens and the earth was completed in six days. So there is no contradiction concerning the period in which Allaah created the heavens and the earth. There cannot be any such contradictions in the Qur’aan.

So you see that these people's ignorance of how the Arabic language is used to describe time periods led to their thinking there was a contradiction, because English has different linguistic conventions, and anyone who speaks more than one language will know that you cannot make a direct equivalence between linguistic structures of two different languages, especially when they come from different language groups.
Apart from linguistic knowledge, other types of knowledge are essential such as knowledge about abrogation in the Qur'an and knowledge of the context and situation in which each verse was revealed.

With regards to Western scholars interpreting the Qur'an, we need to break this down a bit. What do I mean by a Western scholar? I'm not talking about the person's national or cultural background. I mean a scholar who works within the disciplines and methodologies of Western scholarly methods, as opposed to Islamic methodology.

This could come in three categories:

1. Muslim scholars who use Western methodology

2. Non-Muslim scholars who are interested in Islamic studies out of intellectual curiosity

3. Non-Muslim scholars who are interested in Islamic studies for the purposes of opposing and casting doubt on Islam and levelling allegations against it.

As for the first category, there are not that many and I don't know the exact rulings on it, but I have seen it done in one case using literary criticism and it was not correct as the context of the situation in which the verses were revealed was ignored.

As for the second category, they are usually not focused on interpreting the Qur'an. You have to think about why somebody would want to give an interpretation of the Qur'an, what is the aim? For Muslims, they want to gain spiritual benefit by understanding what Allah has revealed; to thereby increase their faith and know what is required of them in terms of beliefs and actions. For someone who is just interested in Islam without believing in it, they are more likely to focus on other subjects like Islamic history. If they do comment on the Qur'an, it is more likely to be in terms of drawing attention to certain linguistic aspects.

For the third category, clearly I don't support this. Not only is this a malicious aim, but the approach used is very flawed and full of errors and misconceptions, sometimes wilful misinterpretation. For example, there was an Islamicist named Patricia Crone who had a revisionist approach to Islamic history; she cast doubt on Islamic texts recording the sayings and actions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and called the history of Islam as recounted by Muslims into question. One of the ways she did this was to allege that the early Muslim community arose in another part of Arabia than Makkah.

Now not only was this self-contradictory given that she also stated that the Prophet publicly recited the Qur'an to his followers, and that Makkah is mentioned in the Qur'an, but she also used misinterpretation of the Qur'an to put forward her argument.

For example, she tried to allege that the Muslims' opponents in Arabia were monotheists, situating them thereby in the north of Arabia rather than in the Hijaz (the area of Makkah and Madina) where people were polytheistic. She argued that since these opponents recognised Allah as the Lord and Creator, they were essentially monotheists and thus she reduced the dispute between them and the believers to a disagreement over the role of the angels.
However, since Crone was a historian, not a theologian, she doesn't realise that monotheism means more than recognising Allah as the Lord. It also means that you have to reject worship of all other deities and declare that only Allah is worthy of worship. So she ignored all of the verses that mention how the polytheists of Makkah used to call on the jinn for protection, and that mention some of the polytheistic deities by name, and that mention what the polytheists used to say about their gods.

That's just one example; I could give many. But clearly this kind of thing is inadmissible.
Now, does that mean that Western scholars are to be completely dismissed and rejected, and that they have no role in Islamic studies? No, I don't think it does, and in sha Allah I will get back to you with some of the positive contributions made by some Western scholars later on as I have now run out of time.

@HooverIsAlwaysBrooken
I'm so sorry I haven't got back to you with the answers to all your questions; I got sidetracked by another active thread I was on, so I'm going to have to delay once again with finishing my answer about western scholars in Islamic studies. Sorry about that.
I will quickly answer your point about law and religion though. Basically there is nothing akin to the division of church and state in Christianity. Because Islam is a complete way of life and there is a developed legal system within the religion itself. As well as being the last of the Prophets, Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was also the leader of the city-state of Madinah and there were several years during which the Islamic laws were fully implemented within his own lifetime, and in which the whole Arabian peninsula was gradually coming to Islam.

So in theory, there is no division between law and religion in Islam, but in practice due to geopolitical factors we have ended up in a situation where most of the Muslim majority countries have a civil legal system in addition to Islamic law for some matters.

I actually feel sorry for the Muslim dc being raised in this environment.
There will definitely be gays amongst their community. How very sad they are being raised to feel ashamed or as if homosexuality doesn’t exist and you are simply bad if you even acknowledge it. I do believe if you want to spread this rhetoric around you should try to live somewhere that is in support of it ie not the uk, if anything this is part of the reason schools probably have to educate dc from a young age to catch them before they’re brainwashed at home.
I don’t believe in some of the uks policies for very young dc surrounding sexual health education though. The thing is though it’s always one size fits all in state schools and some dc will actually benefit from it I suppose.

@woodhill
I'm sorry for not answering your post earlier. It's a while since I studied it, but basically in the time between when Jesus (peace be upon him) was raised up to heaven, and the time of Christianity becoming the dominant religion of the Roman Empire, the early Christians were very diverse. There were many different sects and groups each of which had their own texts, some of which they referred to as the Gospel. Once Christianity became dominant and started to define what was considered orthodox, they held ecumenical councils to define their creed and debate other matters. One of these councils considered many of the texts to decide which Gospels, Epistles and other texts would be included in the New Testament canon. Some of the other Gospels were ruthlessly suppressed so that we now only know of them from some brief quotations in the works of the Church Fathers. Others survived as texts but were not considered as Scripture by Christians.

In the 1940s several Gnostic texts including some 'Gospels' were discovered at Nag Hammadi in Egypt buried in a jar. This meant that some previously lost texts could be read.

You can read more about all this on Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha

I'm not sure how accurate everything in these articles is but it's just to give you a general overview

in theory, there is no division between law and religion in Islam, but in practice due to geopolitical factors we have ended up in a situation where most of the Muslim majority countries have a civil legal system in addition to Islamic law for some matters

While perfectly true, isn't the extending of this to countries which don't have a muslim majority where problems start to creep in?

It's absolutely not the UK's place to dictate how other nations should arrange such things, but equally it seems a bit much to choose to raise a family here and expect to have a pick n' mix approach to the law

Thank you Breeze

@churgon Exactly! It's damaging to teach children that homosexuality is wrong.

Although it a seems like this thread more exists so that a certain poster can proselytise about Islam.

Arrays I’m merely answering the questions that other posters have asked me on this thread. It seems that Muslims are seen as being to blame for everything, even answering the questions they’re asked.
Probably if I hadn’t answered the questions someone would have a negative spin on that too like ignoring people or being unable to back up my statements.

Puzzled I think there are two separate points here. Firstly the idea that people are choosing to raise families here. I don’t think it’s that simple. On a few posts on various threads I’ve noticed a perception that Muslims live in a country, then elect to come to the UK to live out of preference, then start making demands and expecting everyone to pander to them. I think it’s important to point out that that’s not necessarily true. Many Muslims were born in the UK, some have dual nationality but for whatever reason can’t go back to their other country, some are converts with no second nationality, others are asylum seekers or refugees who can’t go back to their country. So a lot of people feel a bit trapped and also a bit alienated as they have the right to practise their religion here, but some people resent them for exercising that right. Not to mention that some people who were born here but have another country of origin can feel a bit stuck between two cultures and that they don’t fully fit in anywhere.
With regards to a pick and mix approach to the law, I’m not 100 % sure what you mean by this. From the beginning of this controversy I was of the opinion that the parents should simply have withdrawn their children from the lessons and I was not in favour of the type of protest. I feel that where possible existing legal provisions should be utilised as legal rights cannot be denied and also this generally leads to less conflict with other groups. However, even those that did protest, I still don’t see how they were in breach of the law. The law allows for peaceful demonstrations.
The issue now is that the law on SRE is about to change and it’s not clear exactly what that will mean in practice. I think one of the outcomes of this should be that the govt seeks to clarify exactly what parental rights are in different types of schools and also what will happen if parent consultations on lessons don’t lead to a consensus.
I’m genuinely interested if you could clarify what you mean exactly by pick and mix approach because one of the criticisms often levelled at Muslims is that they ‘need to abide by the laws if they want to live here’ but this is often mentioned in relation to issues where they are not going against the law e.g. wearing hijab, halal slaughter etc. If you could give me an example of what you mean I would appreciate that but preferably not related to lgbt if possible so as not to let things get heated again.