HALAL MEAT YES OR NO ACCORDING TO THE QURAN!

[The_dip_sticks 0]

just as a quickly.. as slightly lazy to fully get going with a debate

http://www.jucanada.org/halalguidelines.htm

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/issue_stunning.html

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/mechanical_slaughter.html

"Halal" is an Arabic word that means ‘lawful’. In Islam certain things are lawful and other things are not. The latter are called ‘haram’ and include things such as drinking alcohol, sex outside marriage and eating animals that are not herbivores (such as pigs).

When talking about halal meat we are talking about meat which is lawful for a Muslim to eat, i.e. the animal has been treated and slaughtered in a manner that has been deemed appropriate by God.

Halal not only refers to the actual slaughter of the animal but is also tied in to the welfare of the animal as well as the state of mind, body and soul of the person taking that animal’s life.

So what makes meat halal?

The principles of halal can be split into 3 areas;

The actual slaughter

The welfare of the animal

The state of the slaughterer.

The Slaughter

The following procedures constitute the ideal procedure for slaughtering an animal…

The animal is given a drink of water and is to be placed lying down facing Mecca

The animal must be calmed

The animal is not allowed to see other animals going to slaughter or being slaughtered and ideally not let to smell other animals’ blood

The animal can at no time see the knife

The knife must be razor sharp

A prayer must be read and the intention to take the animal’s life for the correct reasons must be made

The neck must be slit in one clean pull of the knife cutting through the skin and oesophagus right to the back of the neck

The animal must be held securely until all life has left it

These methods are used as they are believed to be the kindest and most effective way of slaughtering.

Stunning is not the considered as an ideal method of slaughtering but some Islamic scholars have permitted it. Therefore much of the halal meat in the UK is stunned and bled just like any other meat. The only difference is that halal meat would be cut by a Muslim.

The Welfare

The Quran, along with the Torah and Bible, is one of the original animal rights texts. In addition, many of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad demand that Muslims treat animals mercifully and with kindness. In one he says, "God calls for mercy in everything, so be merciful when you kill and when you slaughter: sharpen your blade to relieve its pain".

Technically speaking, Islam opposes battery and intense farming as they are seen as an exploitation of animals. Therefore from birth to death an animal should be reared and cared for in a natural and stress-free environment.

The State of the Slaughterer

The act of taking an animal’s life is called a "sacrifice". This points to the fact that within Islam an an

Hi,

Thanks for the response.

Ok the issue really is about hadith or not. Personaly I dont follow the hadith as it is man made and is not God's system. the barbaric punishments i.e the stoning of adulterers, cutting limbs off killing apostates etc and the non equality of women etc are all in the hadith not the Quran. Hence I dont believe in the hadith. So my point is to re-examine the Quran without the corrupted hadiths, if you do that than you will never find that slaughtering the animal in the way prescribed by hadith. You also made an argument about we should follow the SUNNAH from hadith because it is sayings and actions of the prophet. I have already debunked this and the Quran clearly states there is only ONE sunnah and that is Gods. Please read my previous post "hadith is not Islam" people have tried to argue that we must folow the hadiths and I have responded.

But... if you insist on following corrupted man made hadiths as I stated in the post this is not for you.

It is basicaly for "free thinkers" who are sick of old men trying to tell us what to do by following corrupted hadiths. It is what I believe as TRUE Islam. In my opinion Islam has been in the dark for some 1200 years, 200 years after the passing of the prophet people started making hadiths and in my opinion put Islam in the dark. Muhammed had absolutely no authority to say anything other than whats in the Quran and was not even allowed to EXPLAIN the Quran. This is between one soul and God.

The hadiths have also split muslims, its because of the hadiths you have sunni, shia, wahabi etc without hadiths and only Quran the muslims would be one and united. The following is a post I posted before for someone arguing we should follow hadith http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90 click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's Hubby)

[Nasturtium 500]

And this was communicated to Peter in a dream when he was wondering (as were a lot of other early Christians) whether new converts had to become Jews first in order to be Christians. The answer was 'call nothing that God has made unclean', or 'once again, Peter, you may be the rock but goodness you're clueless at times.'

Exactly. It was also a direct hit to the concept of Rabbinical kosher-ism.. perfect example being it says (Ex 23:19) to not boil a kid in its mother's milk. Rabbinical kosher laws then go on to seperate all dairy from meats, including to the point of using seperate utensils and plates and sinks in the extreme. Conservative or Torah kosher people will take that to be exactly what it says, and just stay away from that action based on the idea that it is reprehensible to extinguish an animal line for one, and rather insentitive on the otherhand and finally just forbidden simply as written. Anyway, this was extended to the point of it being unclean to even sit with goyim in their houses and associate with them.. which of course would make it difficult to ever talk to them about the gospel and also presented an issue of should they, as peter felt, become Jews prior to or as part of their conversion.

[amal 4]

Our belief...

*any mention of meat excludes pork*

We are supposed to eat what is halal, yes. If no halal food is available to you then you are "excused" and Allah does not look down upon you for eating what IS available as long as you say Bismillah before eating. As far as "do we know if the halal food in the store is really halal" question. It is an easy answer for me. My intent is to eat halal food. The package says halal and that is the only information I have on it, therefore, to me it is "halal enough" and more halal than the regular meat. We ALWAYS say Bismillah before eating meat wether the package says its halal or not. If the only meat that is available is meat that says its halal, then how much more halal can you get unless you slaughter it yourself? Allah is most forgiving and most merciful. If you buy halal with the intent of eating halal then it is accepted. Adding Bismillah is even better. You can only do as good as what is available to you.

That is just my honest opinion and the way my family believes.

amal

[m&n 0]

just as a quickly.. as slightly lazy to fully get going with a debate

http://www.jucanada.org/halalguidelines.htm

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/issue_stunning.html

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/mechanical_slaughter.html

"Halal" is an Arabic word that means ‘lawful’. In Islam certain things are lawful and other things are not. The latter are called ‘haram’ and include things such as drinking alcohol, sex outside marriage and eating animals that are not herbivores (such as pigs).

When talking about halal meat we are talking about meat which is lawful for a Muslim to eat, i.e. the animal has been treated and slaughtered in a manner that has been deemed appropriate by God.

Halal not only refers to the actual slaughter of the animal but is also tied in to the welfare of the animal as well as the state of mind, body and soul of the person taking that animal’s life.

So what makes meat halal?

The principles of halal can be split into 3 areas;

The actual slaughter

The welfare of the animal

The state of the slaughterer.

The Slaughter

The following procedures constitute the ideal procedure for slaughtering an animal…

The animal is given a drink of water and is to be placed lying down facing Mecca

The animal must be calmed

The animal is not allowed to see other animals going to slaughter or being slaughtered and ideally not let to smell other animals’ blood

The animal can at no time see the knife

The knife must be razor sharp

A prayer must be read and the intention to take the animal’s life for the correct reasons must be made

The neck must be slit in one clean pull of the knife cutting through the skin and oesophagus right to the back of the neck

The animal must be held securely until all life has left it

These methods are used as they are believed to be the kindest and most effective way of slaughtering.

Stunning is not the considered as an ideal method of slaughtering but some Islamic scholars have permitted it. Therefore much of the halal meat in the UK is stunned and bled just like any other meat. The only difference is that halal meat would be cut by a Muslim.

The Welfare

The Quran, along with the Torah and Bible, is one of the original animal rights texts. In addition, many of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad demand that Muslims treat animals mercifully and with kindness. In one he says, "God calls for mercy in everything, so be merciful when you kill and when you slaughter: sharpen your blade to relieve its pain".

Technically speaking, Islam opposes battery and intense farming as they are seen as an exploitation of animals. Therefore from birth to death an animal should be reared and cared for in a natural and stress-free environment.

The State of the Slaughterer

The act of taking an animal’s life is called a "sacrifice". This points to the fact that within Islam an an

Hi,

Thanks for the response.

Ok the issue really is about hadith or not. Personaly I dont follow the hadith as it is man made and is not God's system. the barbaric punishments i.e the stoning of adulterers, cutting limbs off killing apostates etc and the non equality of women etc are all in the hadith not the Quran. Hence I dont believe in the hadith. So my point is to re-examine the Quran without the corrupted hadiths, if you do that than you will never find that slaughtering the animal in the way prescribed by hadith. You also made an argument about we should follow the SUNNAH from hadith because it is sayings and actions of the prophet. I have already debunked this and the Quran clearly states there is only ONE sunnah and that is Gods. Please read my previous post "hadith is not Islam" people have tried to argue that we must folow the hadiths and I have responded. But... if you insist on following corrupted man made hadiths as I stated in the post this is not for you.

It is basicaly for "free thinkers" who are sick of old men trying to tell us what to do by following corrupted hadiths. It is what I believe as TRUE Islam. In my opinion Islam has been in the dark for some 1200 years, 200 years after the passing of the prophet people started making hadiths and in my opinion put Islam in the dark. Muhammed had absolutely no authority to say anything other than whats in the Quran and was not even allowed to EXPLAIN the Quran. This is between one soul and God.

The hadiths have also split muslims, its because of the hadiths you have sunni, shia, wahabi etc without hadiths and only Quran the muslims would be one and united. The following is a post I posted before for someone arguing we should follow hadith http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90 click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's Hubby)

Everyone is entiltled to their own opinion. It is best, however, that one formulate their opinion based on facts from reliable sources. The internet is full of websites containing both reliable & unrelieable information. We should be very careful in our quest for religious understanding.

"Barbaric punishments" are mentioned in the Quran. For example, the stoning of adulterers is mentioned in detail in Sura AlNur, Sura # 24 in I believe

verses 4 & 5.

If one regularly reads the Quran, one will know that there are many things that need detailed explanations and that is what the SOUND hadiths are for......to explain the Quran.

Indeed we should not follow corrupted hadiths and it is true that there is one sunna and that is God's, but God appointed the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) to teach the people this sunnah and when people try to follow the example that the Prophet set, they are trying to follow the sunna, the UNcorrupted hadiths are just explanations of how the Prophet dealt in all aspects of life......they were documented to give people an example to follow.....they were not meant to cause discord amongst the people.

The Muslims became divided long before the hadiths were even compiled into volumes of books. Division occurred due to human greed for power and authority as soon as the Prophet (pbuh) had passed away.

It is honestly not my intent to cause any problems or offend anyone with my post.............only to state my opinion.

[The_dip_sticks 0]

just as a quickly.. as slightly lazy to fully get going with a debate

http://www.jucanada.org/halalguidelines.htm

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/issue_stunning.html

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/mechanical_slaughter.html

"Halal" is an Arabic word that means ‘lawful’. In Islam certain things are lawful and other things are not. The latter are called ‘haram’ and include things such as drinking alcohol, sex outside marriage and eating animals that are not herbivores (such as pigs).

When talking about halal meat we are talking about meat which is lawful for a Muslim to eat, i.e. the animal has been treated and slaughtered in a manner that has been deemed appropriate by God.

Halal not only refers to the actual slaughter of the animal but is also tied in to the welfare of the animal as well as the state of mind, body and soul of the person taking that animal’s life.

So what makes meat halal?

The principles of halal can be split into 3 areas;

The actual slaughter

The welfare of the animal

The state of the slaughterer.

The Slaughter

The following procedures constitute the ideal procedure for slaughtering an animal…

The animal is given a drink of water and is to be placed lying down facing Mecca

The animal must be calmed

The animal is not allowed to see other animals going to slaughter or being slaughtered and ideally not let to smell other animals’ blood

The animal can at no time see the knife

The knife must be razor sharp

A prayer must be read and the intention to take the animal’s life for the correct reasons must be made

The neck must be slit in one clean pull of the knife cutting through the skin and oesophagus right to the back of the neck

The animal must be held securely until all life has left it

These methods are used as they are believed to be the kindest and most effective way of slaughtering.

Stunning is not the considered as an ideal method of slaughtering but some Islamic scholars have permitted it. Therefore much of the halal meat in the UK is stunned and bled just like any other meat. The only difference is that halal meat would be cut by a Muslim.

The Welfare

The Quran, along with the Torah and Bible, is one of the original animal rights texts. In addition, many of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad demand that Muslims treat animals mercifully and with kindness. In one he says, "God calls for mercy in everything, so be merciful when you kill and when you slaughter: sharpen your blade to relieve its pain".

Technically speaking, Islam opposes battery and intense farming as they are seen as an exploitation of animals. Therefore from birth to death an animal should be reared and cared for in a natural and stress-free environment.

The State of the Slaughterer

The act of taking an animal’s life is called a "sacrifice". This points to the fact that within Islam an an

Hi,

Thanks for the response.

Ok the issue really is about hadith or not. Personaly I dont follow the hadith as it is man made and is not God's system. the barbaric punishments i.e the stoning of adulterers, cutting limbs off killing apostates etc and the non equality of women etc are all in the hadith not the Quran. Hence I dont believe in the hadith. So my point is to re-examine the Quran without the corrupted hadiths, if you do that than you will never find that slaughtering the animal in the way prescribed by hadith. You also made an argument about we should follow the SUNNAH from hadith because it is sayings and actions of the prophet. I have already debunked this and the Quran clearly states there is only ONE sunnah and that is Gods. Please read my previous post "hadith is not Islam" people have tried to argue that we must folow the hadiths and I have responded. But... if you insist on following corrupted man made hadiths as I stated in the post this is not for you.

It is basicaly for "free thinkers" who are sick of old men trying to tell us what to do by following corrupted hadiths. It is what I believe as TRUE Islam. In my opinion Islam has been in the dark for some 1200 years, 200 years after the passing of the prophet people started making hadiths and in my opinion put Islam in the dark. Muhammed had absolutely no authority to say anything other than whats in the Quran and was not even allowed to EXPLAIN the Quran. This is between one soul and God.

The hadiths have also split muslims, its because of the hadiths you have sunni, shia, wahabi etc without hadiths and only Quran the muslims would be one and united. The following is a post I posted before for someone arguing we should follow hadith http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90 click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's Hubby)

Everyone is entiltled to their own opinion. It is best, however, that one formulate their opinion based on facts from reliable sources. The internet is full of websites containing both reliable & unrelieable information. We should be very careful in our quest for religious understanding.

"Barbaric punishments" are mentioned in the Quran. For example, the stoning of adulterers is mentioned in detail in Sura AlNur, Sura # 24 in I believe

verses 4 & 5.

If one regularly reads the Quran, one will know that there are many things that need detailed explanations and that is what the SOUND hadiths are for......to explain the Quran.

Indeed we should not follow corrupted hadiths and it is true that there is one sunna and that is God's, but God appointed the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) to teach the people this sunnah and when people try to follow the example that the Prophet set, they are trying to follow the sunna, the UNcorrupted hadiths are just explanations of how the Prophet dealt in all aspects of life......they were documented to give people an example to follow.....they were not meant to cause discord amongst the people.

The Muslims became divided long before the hadiths were even compiled into volumes of books. Division occurred due to human greed for power and authority as soon as the Prophet (pbuh) had passed away.

It is honestly not my intent to cause any problems or offend anyone with my post.............only to state my opinion.

Hi,

thanks for the response. But lets try and at least be accurate and back our words up.

Ok first of all. There is NO stoning in Quran I really dont know what Quran you have been reading surah 24 or not.

Secondly I have already explained that there is no Muhammeds Sunnah, the QURAN says it itself!.. not my words.

Third devision by muslims is a hadith based history, which I dont follow so it is of no revelence and also EVEN if they did they would not have different names, show me sunni, shiah, wahibi in the Quran, who made these names???.. the Quran states your either a muslim and or a mumin, the difference being this ‘Muslims’ (those who simply have submitted to God) and ‘Mumins’ (those who have advanced and strive with their wealth and lives in the sake of God). So shiah, sunni please show me.

Again as the previously read this post and than tell me about which sunnah you follow. http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90[/url] click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's hubby)

[m&n 0]

just as a quickly.. as slightly lazy to fully get going with a debate

http://www.jucanada.org/halalguidelines.htm

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/issue_stunning.html

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/mechanical_slaughter.html

"Halal" is an Arabic word that means ‘lawful’. In Islam certain things are lawful and other things are not. The latter are called ‘haram’ and include things such as drinking alcohol, sex outside marriage and eating animals that are not herbivores (such as pigs).

When talking about halal meat we are talking about meat which is lawful for a Muslim to eat, i.e. the animal has been treated and slaughtered in a manner that has been deemed appropriate by God.

Halal not only refers to the actual slaughter of the animal but is also tied in to the welfare of the animal as well as the state of mind, body and soul of the person taking that animal’s life.

So what makes meat halal?

The principles of halal can be split into 3 areas;

The actual slaughter

The welfare of the animal

The state of the slaughterer.

The Slaughter

The following procedures constitute the ideal procedure for slaughtering an animal…

The animal is given a drink of water and is to be placed lying down facing Mecca

The animal must be calmed

The animal is not allowed to see other animals going to slaughter or being slaughtered and ideally not let to smell other animals’ blood

The animal can at no time see the knife

The knife must be razor sharp

A prayer must be read and the intention to take the animal’s life for the correct reasons must be made

The neck must be slit in one clean pull of the knife cutting through the skin and oesophagus right to the back of the neck

The animal must be held securely until all life has left it

These methods are used as they are believed to be the kindest and most effective way of slaughtering.

Stunning is not the considered as an ideal method of slaughtering but some Islamic scholars have permitted it. Therefore much of the halal meat in the UK is stunned and bled just like any other meat. The only difference is that halal meat would be cut by a Muslim.

The Welfare

The Quran, along with the Torah and Bible, is one of the original animal rights texts. In addition, many of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad demand that Muslims treat animals mercifully and with kindness. In one he says, "God calls for mercy in everything, so be merciful when you kill and when you slaughter: sharpen your blade to relieve its pain".

Technically speaking, Islam opposes battery and intense farming as they are seen as an exploitation of animals. Therefore from birth to death an animal should be reared and cared for in a natural and stress-free environment.

The State of the Slaughterer

The act of taking an animal’s life is called a "sacrifice". This points to the fact that within Islam an an

Hi,

Thanks for the response.

Ok the issue really is about hadith or not. Personaly I dont follow the hadith as it is man made and is not God's system. the barbaric punishments i.e the stoning of adulterers, cutting limbs off killing apostates etc and the non equality of women etc are all in the hadith not the Quran. Hence I dont believe in the hadith. So my point is to re-examine the Quran without the corrupted hadiths, if you do that than you will never find that slaughtering the animal in the way prescribed by hadith. You also made an argument about we should follow the SUNNAH from hadith because it is sayings and actions of the prophet. I have already debunked this and the Quran clearly states there is only ONE sunnah and that is Gods. Please read my previous post "hadith is not Islam" people have tried to argue that we must folow the hadiths and I have responded. But... if you insist on following corrupted man made hadiths as I stated in the post this is not for you.

It is basicaly for "free thinkers" who are sick of old men trying to tell us what to do by following corrupted hadiths. It is what I believe as TRUE Islam. In my opinion Islam has been in the dark for some 1200 years, 200 years after the passing of the prophet people started making hadiths and in my opinion put Islam in the dark. Muhammed had absolutely no authority to say anything other than whats in the Quran and was not even allowed to EXPLAIN the Quran. This is between one soul and God.

The hadiths have also split muslims, its because of the hadiths you have sunni, shia, wahabi etc without hadiths and only Quran the muslims would be one and united. The following is a post I posted before for someone arguing we should follow hadith http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90 click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's Hubby)

Everyone is entiltled to their own opinion. It is best, however, that one formulate their opinion based on facts from reliable sources. The internet is full of websites containing both reliable & unrelieable information. We should be very careful in our quest for religious understanding.

"Barbaric punishments" are mentioned in the Quran. For example, the stoning of adulterers is mentioned in detail in Sura AlNur, Sura # 24 in I believe

verses 4 & 5.

If one regularly reads the Quran, one will know that there are many things that need detailed explanations and that is what the SOUND hadiths are for......to explain the Quran.

Indeed we should not follow corrupted hadiths and it is true that there is one sunna and that is God's, but God appointed the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) to teach the people this sunnah and when people try to follow the example that the Prophet set, they are trying to follow the sunna, the UNcorrupted hadiths are just explanations of how the Prophet dealt in all aspects of life......they were documented to give people an example to follow.....they were not meant to cause discord amongst the people.

The Muslims became divided long before the hadiths were even compiled into volumes of books. Division occurred due to human greed for power and authority as soon as the Prophet (pbuh) had passed away.

It is honestly not my intent to cause any problems or offend anyone with my post.............only to state my opinion.

Hi,

thanks for the response. But lets try and at least be accurate and back our words up.

Ok first of all. There is NO stoning in Quran I really dont know what Quran you have been reading surah 24 or not.

Secondly I have already explained that there is no Muhammeds Sunnah, the QURAN says it itself!.. not my words.

Third devision by muslims is a hadith based history, which I dont follow so it is of no revelence and also EVEN if they did they would not have different names, show me sunni, shiah, wahibi in the Quran, who made these names???.. the Quran states your either a muslim and or a mumin, the difference being this ‘Muslims’ (those who simply have submitted to God) and ‘Mumins’ (those who have advanced and strive with their wealth and lives in the sake of God). So shiah, sunni please show me.

Again as the previously read this post and than tell me about which sunnah you follow. http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90[/url] click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's hubby)

Exactly. Let's try and be accurate and clear up any misunderstandings.

Surah 24 (Al Nur) Verse 2 through 5 talk about the flogging of those guilty of "zina" which in Arabic means intercourse between a man & a woman not married to each other.

According to interpretation, zina applies both to adultery (which implies that one or both of the parties are married to a person or persons other than the ones concerned) and to fornication (which implies that both parties are unmarried). The "barbaric" flogging 100 times is the punishment for zina. The prophet pbuh explained that temptation while one is married should be less and thus, through his teachings and interpretations of these verses we know that punishment for zina for one that is married is stoning to death. If we didn't follow hadith or take them into consideration, would we just say that someone who committed adultery should just be let free with no punishment at all.........would that make sense........would that be fair?

[chaishai 1]

And this was communicated to Peter in a dream when he was wondering (as were a lot of other early Christians) whether new converts had to become Jews first in order to be Christians. The answer was 'call nothing that God has made unclean', or 'once again, Peter, you may be the rock but goodness you're clueless at times.'

Exactly. It was also a direct hit to the concept of Rabbinical kosher-ism.. perfect example being it says (Ex 23:19) to not boil a kid in its mother's milk. Rabbinical kosher laws then go on to seperate all dairy from meats, including to the point of using seperate utensils and plates and sinks in the extreme. Conservative or Torah kosher people will take that to be exactly what it says, and just stay away from that action based on the idea that it is reprehensible to extinguish an animal line for one, and rather insentitive on the otherhand and finally just forbidden simply as written. Anyway, this was extended to the point of it being unclean to even sit with goyim in their houses and associate with them.. which of course would make it difficult to ever talk to them about the gospel and also presented an issue of should they, as peter felt, become Jews prior to or as part of their conversion.

When was this? Not now... Orthodox jews - even chassidic jews will sit in a non jews house and associate with them....??

[m&n 0]

I was wondering......what is goyim?

And this was communicated to Peter in a dream when he was wondering (as were a lot of other early Christians) whether new converts had to become Jews first in order to be Christians. The answer was 'call nothing that God has made unclean', or 'once again, Peter, you may be the rock but goodness you're clueless at times.'

Exactly. It was also a direct hit to the concept of Rabbinical kosher-ism.. perfect example being it says (Ex 23:19) to not boil a kid in its mother's milk. Rabbinical kosher laws then go on to seperate all dairy from meats, including to the point of using seperate utensils and plates and sinks in the extreme. Conservative or Torah kosher people will take that to be exactly what it says, and just stay away from that action based on the idea that it is reprehensible to extinguish an animal line for one, and rather insentitive on the otherhand and finally just forbidden simply as written. Anyway, this was extended to the point of it being unclean to even sit with goyim in their houses and associate with them.. which of course would make it difficult to ever talk to them about the gospel and also presented an issue of should they, as peter felt, become Jews prior to or as part of their conversion.

When was this? Not now... Orthodox jews - even chassidic jews will sit in a non jews house and associate with them....??

[chaishai 1]

I was wondering......what is goyim?

And this was communicated to Peter in a dream when he was wondering (as were a lot of other early Christians) whether new converts had to become Jews first in order to be Christians. The answer was 'call nothing that God has made unclean', or 'once again, Peter, you may be the rock but goodness you're clueless at times.'

Exactly. It was also a direct hit to the concept of Rabbinical kosher-ism.. perfect example being it says (Ex 23:19) to not boil a kid in its mother's milk. Rabbinical kosher laws then go on to seperate all dairy from meats, including to the point of using seperate utensils and plates and sinks in the extreme. Conservative or Torah kosher people will take that to be exactly what it says, and just stay away from that action based on the idea that it is reprehensible to extinguish an animal line for one, and rather insentitive on the otherhand and finally just forbidden simply as written. Anyway, this was extended to the point of it being unclean to even sit with goyim in their houses and associate with them.. which of course would make it difficult to ever talk to them about the gospel and also presented an issue of should they, as peter felt, become Jews prior to or as part of their conversion.

When was this? Not now... Orthodox jews - even chassidic jews will sit in a non jews house and associate with them....??

goyim is hebrew for gentile. the suffix? "im" on the end of a word in hebrew makes it plural and the word goy means "nation" so it technically means people from other nations. when its used in israel it is harmless but i feel like when its used in america its kinda derogatory..... technically its not a derogatory term but it gives a bad vibe to me.

[m&n 0]

thanks

I was wondering......what is goyim?

And this was communicated to Peter in a dream when he was wondering (as were a lot of other early Christians) whether new converts had to become Jews first in order to be Christians. The answer was 'call nothing that God has made unclean', or 'once again, Peter, you may be the rock but goodness you're clueless at times.'

Exactly. It was also a direct hit to the concept of Rabbinical kosher-ism.. perfect example being it says (Ex 23:19) to not boil a kid in its mother's milk. Rabbinical kosher laws then go on to seperate all dairy from meats, including to the point of using seperate utensils and plates and sinks in the extreme. Conservative or Torah kosher people will take that to be exactly what it says, and just stay away from that action based on the idea that it is reprehensible to extinguish an animal line for one, and rather insentitive on the otherhand and finally just forbidden simply as written. Anyway, this was extended to the point of it being unclean to even sit with goyim in their houses and associate with them.. which of course would make it difficult to ever talk to them about the gospel and also presented an issue of should they, as peter felt, become Jews prior to or as part of their conversion.

When was this? Not now... Orthodox jews - even chassidic jews will sit in a non jews house and associate with them....??

goyim is hebrew for gentile. the suffix? "im" on the end of a word in hebrew makes it plural and the word goy means "nation" so it technically means people from other nations. when its used in israel it is harmless but i feel like when its used in america its kinda derogatory..... technically its not a derogatory term but it gives a bad vibe to me.

[The_dip_sticks 0]

just as a quickly.. as slightly lazy to fully get going with a debate

http://www.jucanada.org/halalguidelines.htm

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/issue_stunning.html

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/mechanical_slaughter.html

"Halal" is an Arabic word that means ‘lawful’. In Islam certain things are lawful and other things are not. The latter are called ‘haram’ and include things such as drinking alcohol, sex outside marriage and eating animals that are not herbivores (such as pigs).

When talking about halal meat we are talking about meat which is lawful for a Muslim to eat, i.e. the animal has been treated and slaughtered in a manner that has been deemed appropriate by God.

Halal not only refers to the actual slaughter of the animal but is also tied in to the welfare of the animal as well as the state of mind, body and soul of the person taking that animal’s life.

So what makes meat halal?

The principles of halal can be split into 3 areas;

The actual slaughter

The welfare of the animal

The state of the slaughterer.

The Slaughter

The following procedures constitute the ideal procedure for slaughtering an animal…

The animal is given a drink of water and is to be placed lying down facing Mecca

The animal must be calmed

The animal is not allowed to see other animals going to slaughter or being slaughtered and ideally not let to smell other animals’ blood

The animal can at no time see the knife

The knife must be razor sharp

A prayer must be read and the intention to take the animal’s life for the correct reasons must be made

The neck must be slit in one clean pull of the knife cutting through the skin and oesophagus right to the back of the neck

The animal must be held securely until all life has left it

These methods are used as they are believed to be the kindest and most effective way of slaughtering.

Stunning is not the considered as an ideal method of slaughtering but some Islamic scholars have permitted it. Therefore much of the halal meat in the UK is stunned and bled just like any other meat. The only difference is that halal meat would be cut by a Muslim.

The Welfare

The Quran, along with the Torah and Bible, is one of the original animal rights texts. In addition, many of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad demand that Muslims treat animals mercifully and with kindness. In one he says, "God calls for mercy in everything, so be merciful when you kill and when you slaughter: sharpen your blade to relieve its pain".

Technically speaking, Islam opposes battery and intense farming as they are seen as an exploitation of animals. Therefore from birth to death an animal should be reared and cared for in a natural and stress-free environment.

The State of the Slaughterer

The act of taking an animal’s life is called a "sacrifice". This points to the fact that within Islam an an

Hi,

Thanks for the response.

Ok the issue really is about hadith or not. Personaly I dont follow the hadith as it is man made and is not God's system. the barbaric punishments i.e the stoning of adulterers, cutting limbs off killing apostates etc and the non equality of women etc are all in the hadith not the Quran. Hence I dont believe in the hadith. So my point is to re-examine the Quran without the corrupted hadiths, if you do that than you will never find that slaughtering the animal in the way prescribed by hadith. You also made an argument about we should follow the SUNNAH from hadith because it is sayings and actions of the prophet. I have already debunked this and the Quran clearly states there is only ONE sunnah and that is Gods. Please read my previous post "hadith is not Islam" people have tried to argue that we must folow the hadiths and I have responded. But... if you insist on following corrupted man made hadiths as I stated in the post this is not for you.

It is basicaly for "free thinkers" who are sick of old men trying to tell us what to do by following corrupted hadiths. It is what I believe as TRUE Islam. In my opinion Islam has been in the dark for some 1200 years, 200 years after the passing of the prophet people started making hadiths and in my opinion put Islam in the dark. Muhammed had absolutely no authority to say anything other than whats in the Quran and was not even allowed to EXPLAIN the Quran. This is between one soul and God.

The hadiths have also split muslims, its because of the hadiths you have sunni, shia, wahabi etc without hadiths and only Quran the muslims would be one and united. The following is a post I posted before for someone arguing we should follow hadith http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90 click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's Hubby)

Everyone is entiltled to their own opinion. It is best, however, that one formulate their opinion based on facts from reliable sources. The internet is full of websites containing both reliable & unrelieable information. We should be very careful in our quest for religious understanding.

"Barbaric punishments" are mentioned in the Quran. For example, the stoning of adulterers is mentioned in detail in Sura AlNur, Sura # 24 in I believe

verses 4 & 5.

If one regularly reads the Quran, one will know that there are many things that need detailed explanations and that is what the SOUND hadiths are for......to explain the Quran.

Indeed we should not follow corrupted hadiths and it is true that there is one sunna and that is God's, but God appointed the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) to teach the people this sunnah and when people try to follow the example that the Prophet set, they are trying to follow the sunna, the UNcorrupted hadiths are just explanations of how the Prophet dealt in all aspects of life......they were documented to give people an example to follow.....they were not meant to cause discord amongst the people.

The Muslims became divided long before the hadiths were even compiled into volumes of books. Division occurred due to human greed for power and authority as soon as the Prophet (pbuh) had passed away.

It is honestly not my intent to cause any problems or offend anyone with my post.............only to state my opinion.

Hi,

thanks for the response. But lets try and at least be accurate and back our words up.

Ok first of all. There is NO stoning in Quran I really dont know what Quran you have been reading surah 24 or not.

Secondly I have already explained that there is no Muhammeds Sunnah, the QURAN says it itself!.. not my words.

Third devision by muslims is a hadith based history, which I dont follow so it is of no revelence and also EVEN if they did they would not have different names, show me sunni, shiah, wahibi in the Quran, who made these names???.. the Quran states your either a muslim and or a mumin, the difference being this ‘Muslims’ (those who simply have submitted to God) and ‘Mumins’ (those who have advanced and strive with their wealth and lives in the sake of God). So shiah, sunni please show me.

Again as the previously read this post and than tell me about which sunnah you follow. http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90[/url] click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's hubby)

Exactly. Let's try and be accurate and clear up any misunderstandings.

Surah 24 (Al Nur) Verse 2 through 5 talk about the flogging of those guilty of "zina" which in Arabic means intercourse between a man & a woman not married to each other.

According to interpretation, zina applies both to adultery (which implies that one or both of the parties are married to a person or persons other than the ones concerned) and to fornication (which implies that both parties are unmarried). The "barbaric" flogging 100 times is the punishment for zina. The prophet pbuh explained that temptation while one is married should be less and thus, through his teachings and interpretations of these verses we know that punishment for zina for one that is married is stoning to death. If we didn't follow hadith or take them into consideration, would we just say that someone who committed adultery should just be let free with no punishment at all.........would that make sense........would that be fair?

Hi,

First of all you keep going back to the hadith. I have told you that I dont follow the corrupted hadith. I have already explained that Muhammed has no authority to say anything other than the Quran.

Yes the punishment is flogging for adultry. IT IS NOT STONING TO DEATH!!!

You added that Muhammed said to stone them to DEATH... please stoning someone to death is a barbaric ritiual and does not belong in Islam. Muhammed didnt say it, it is corruption of the hadith, thats why I gave you the link in which I proved hadith is not to be followed because Muhammed has no authority to say anything other than the Quran, I gave you the link earlier proving that.

So please dont quote hadith to me, hadith is a corrupted and man made and has no place in Islam.

If you want to follow the garbage that we should stone people to death, thats your business but dont state its from the QUran because I can tell you categorically it is NOT in the Quran.

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's Hubby)

[m&n 0]

I don't follow corrupted hadith either......hey, we have something in common! And you are right, Prophet Mohammed didn't speak on impulse or from a selfish desire.

The punishment is flogging for fornication, not for adultery. The verses talk about the punishment for zina......but in Arabic the meaning of the word includes both fornication & adultery. We know the difference of the punishments between the fornicator and the adulterer only from Quranic interpretations.....some call that hadith.......if others don't like that term, fine, they can call it what they like but that is the only way the Islamic Law has been able to determine the difference between punishment for having intercourse outside of marriage for one that is married and one that is not. There is no where under Islamic Law that states that the punishment for fornication & adultery is equal.........whether or not it is barbaric is another issue. If we didn't follow interpretation of the Quran from what some like to call hadith, would we just say that someone who committed adultery should just be let free with no punishment at all since the verse didn't make that specification.........would that make sense........would that be fair?

Perhaps there is a small sect of muslims that believe that the punishment for fornication & adultery is the same........this I was not aware of.........we learn new things all the time.......

at any rate I think we can agree on something........we can agree to disagree

just as a quickly.. as slightly lazy to fully get going with a debate

http://www.jucanada.org/halalguidelines.htm

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/issue_stunning.html

http://www.halalmc.co.uk/resources/mechanical_slaughter.html

"Halal" is an Arabic word that means ‘lawful’. In Islam certain things are lawful and other things are not. The latter are called ‘haram’ and include things such as drinking alcohol, sex outside marriage and eating animals that are not herbivores (such as pigs).

When talking about halal meat we are talking about meat which is lawful for a Muslim to eat, i.e. the animal has been treated and slaughtered in a manner that has been deemed appropriate by God.

Halal not only refers to the actual slaughter of the animal but is also tied in to the welfare of the animal as well as the state of mind, body and soul of the person taking that animal’s life.

So what makes meat halal?

The principles of halal can be split into 3 areas;

The actual slaughter

The welfare of the animal

The state of the slaughterer.

The Slaughter

The following procedures constitute the ideal procedure for slaughtering an animal…

The animal is given a drink of water and is to be placed lying down facing Mecca

The animal must be calmed

The animal is not allowed to see other animals going to slaughter or being slaughtered and ideally not let to smell other animals’ blood

The animal can at no time see the knife

The knife must be razor sharp

A prayer must be read and the intention to take the animal’s life for the correct reasons must be made

The neck must be slit in one clean pull of the knife cutting through the skin and oesophagus right to the back of the neck

The animal must be held securely until all life has left it

These methods are used as they are believed to be the kindest and most effective way of slaughtering.

Stunning is not the considered as an ideal method of slaughtering but some Islamic scholars have permitted it. Therefore much of the halal meat in the UK is stunned and bled just like any other meat. The only difference is that halal meat would be cut by a Muslim.

The Welfare

The Quran, along with the Torah and Bible, is one of the original animal rights texts. In addition, many of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad demand that Muslims treat animals mercifully and with kindness. In one he says, "God calls for mercy in everything, so be merciful when you kill and when you slaughter: sharpen your blade to relieve its pain".

Technically speaking, Islam opposes battery and intense farming as they are seen as an exploitation of animals. Therefore from birth to death an animal should be reared and cared for in a natural and stress-free environment.

The State of the Slaughterer

The act of taking an animal’s life is called a "sacrifice". This points to the fact that within Islam an an

Hi,

Thanks for the response.

Ok the issue really is about hadith or not. Personaly I dont follow the hadith as it is man made and is not God's system. the barbaric punishments i.e the stoning of adulterers, cutting limbs off killing apostates etc and the non equality of women etc are all in the hadith not the Quran. Hence I dont believe in the hadith. So my point is to re-examine the Quran without the corrupted hadiths, if you do that than you will never find that slaughtering the animal in the way prescribed by hadith. You also made an argument about we should follow the SUNNAH from hadith because it is sayings and actions of the prophet. I have already debunked this and the Quran clearly states there is only ONE sunnah and that is Gods. Please read my previous post "hadith is not Islam" people have tried to argue that we must folow the hadiths and I have responded. But... if you insist on following corrupted man made hadiths as I stated in the post this is not for you.

It is basicaly for "free thinkers" who are sick of old men trying to tell us what to do by following corrupted hadiths. It is what I believe as TRUE Islam. In my opinion Islam has been in the dark for some 1200 years, 200 years after the passing of the prophet people started making hadiths and in my opinion put Islam in the dark. Muhammed had absolutely no authority to say anything other than whats in the Quran and was not even allowed to EXPLAIN the Quran. This is between one soul and God.

The hadiths have also split muslims, its because of the hadiths you have sunni, shia, wahabi etc without hadiths and only Quran the muslims would be one and united. The following is a post I posted before for someone arguing we should follow hadith http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90 click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's Hubby)

Everyone is entiltled to their own opinion. It is best, however, that one formulate their opinion based on facts from reliable sources. The internet is full of websites containing both reliable & unrelieable information. We should be very careful in our quest for religious understanding.

"Barbaric punishments" are mentioned in the Quran. For example, the stoning of adulterers is mentioned in detail in Sura AlNur, Sura # 24 in I believe

verses 4 & 5.

If one regularly reads the Quran, one will know that there are many things that need detailed explanations and that is what the SOUND hadiths are for......to explain the Quran.

Indeed we should not follow corrupted hadiths and it is true that there is one sunna and that is God's, but God appointed the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) to teach the people this sunnah and when people try to follow the example that the Prophet set, they are trying to follow the sunna, the UNcorrupted hadiths are just explanations of how the Prophet dealt in all aspects of life......they were documented to give people an example to follow.....they were not meant to cause discord amongst the people.

The Muslims became divided long before the hadiths were even compiled into volumes of books. Division occurred due to human greed for power and authority as soon as the Prophet (pbuh) had passed away.

It is honestly not my intent to cause any problems or offend anyone with my post.............only to state my opinion.

Hi,

thanks for the response. But lets try and at least be accurate and back our words up.

Ok first of all. There is NO stoning in Quran I really dont know what Quran you have been reading surah 24 or not.

Secondly I have already explained that there is no Muhammeds Sunnah, the QURAN says it itself!.. not my words.

Third devision by muslims is a hadith based history, which I dont follow so it is of no revelence and also EVEN if they did they would not have different names, show me sunni, shiah, wahibi in the Quran, who made these names???.. the Quran states your either a muslim and or a mumin, the difference being this ‘Muslims’ (those who simply have submitted to God) and ‘Mumins’ (those who have advanced and strive with their wealth and lives in the sake of God). So shiah, sunni please show me.

Again as the previously read this post and than tell me about which sunnah you follow. http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...82989&st=90[/url] click the link and go to post number 92

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's hubby)

Exactly. Let's try and be accurate and clear up any misunderstandings.

Surah 24 (Al Nur) Verse 2 through 5 talk about the flogging of those guilty of "zina" which in Arabic means intercourse between a man & a woman not married to each other.

According to interpretation, zina applies both to adultery (which implies that one or both of the parties are married to a person or persons other than the ones concerned) and to fornication (which implies that both parties are unmarried). The "barbaric" flogging 100 times is the punishment for zina. The prophet pbuh explained that temptation while one is married should be less and thus, through his teachings and interpretations of these verses we know that punishment for zina for one that is married is stoning to death. If we didn't follow hadith or take them into consideration, would we just say that someone who committed adultery should just be let free with no punishment at all.........would that make sense........would that be fair?

Hi,

First of all you keep going back to the hadith. I have told you that I dont follow the corrupted hadith. I have already explained that Muhammed has no authority to say anything other than the Quran.

Yes the punishment is flogging for adultry. IT IS NOT STONING TO DEATH!!!

You added that Muhammed said to stone them to DEATH... please stoning someone to death is a barbaric ritiual and does not belong in Islam. Muhammed didnt say it, it is corruption of the hadith, thats why I gave you the link in which I proved hadith is not to be followed because Muhammed has no authority to say anything other than the Quran, I gave you the link earlier proving that.

So please dont quote hadith to me, hadith is a corrupted and man made and has no place in Islam.

If you want to follow the garbage that we should stone people to death, thats your business but dont state its from the QUran because I can tell you categorically it is NOT in the Quran.

Peace

Adiel (Mireya's Hubby)

[Nasturtium 500]

When was this? Not now... Orthodox jews - even chassidic jews will sit in a non jews house and associate with them....??

technically its not a derogatory term but it gives a bad vibe to me.

I used the term since we're talking new testament stuff, so gentile or goyim is what you'd use in reference, or I guess you could say non-Jew, although the point is all the same. It's used either way to refer to the people in the NT.

Caladan and I were not discussing "now" but rather the whole vision of Peter involving clean and unclean things and diet. The majority of poeple were likely never so strict or intense on it, as is the case for people and culture nowdays as well-- it's just not practical or something we have an interest in-- being extremists I mean. A part of the unleanliness of the non-Jews/Romans/Others (to avoid other terms?) was that you were sitting and eatting with them, and thus it would involve supposedly non-kosher foods, which would then make them somthing to not associate with in that manner (over at their houses with their house gods, eating, etc.).

[coolred38 0]

It clearly states in the Quran that those found guilty of zina that are NOT married....get half the punishment of those that are married....in which case, half the amount of flogging. And those that accuse wrongfully get flogged as well.

It also says that only "adulterers can marry adulterers"....how could they marry if they are dead from stoning? There is no stoning punishment for adultery...God says punish them with flogging then if they repent accept them back into the community....how can they repent if they are dead from stoning? Its all there in black and white if people would stop being blinded by hadeeth that sooooo contradict the Mercy and Forgiveness of God in the Quran.

We are commanded to live with People of the Book(ahl al Kitab) as our brothers and sisters in religion....as communities that follow a devine revelation from God....we can marry them, enter business deals with them, be allies with them, eat their food etc.....God requires us to remember God at ALL times and especially when sitting down to eat food that He provided for us. Halal food is food that God is mentioned over before consuming....America is considered a Christian nation...their food is halal for us....but we must follow Islamic guidelines in consuming it.....try as much as possible to be aware where it came from(obviously dont buy it from a truck parked on the corner)....clean and prepare it with hygiene in mind and mention Gods name over it before eating it. Why would God go through the trouble of mentioning that He made Islam easy for us....and then lay down strict rules that could very well be impossible for the ordinary layman to follow...does God expect all Muslims to be slaughtering their own food out back by the woodshed? Also, making meat "halal" in the shops seems to have given some Muslims the opportunity to charge exhorbant prices....sounds like a license to profit at Muslims expense...wheres the halal in that? Just a thought.

[Alhamdulillah 0]

We know that Jews slaughter their meat like the muslims by pronouncing God's name on it making it 'Kosher'

Hi, can you please provide some jewish point of reference that says they mention God's name over the animal before slaughtering it?