Understanding the story of Lot and homosexuality

[TheQuranAloneRevolution]

The problem that I have with using titles to define the content is that this is not done with all of the titles. Does "The Cow" give special meaning to the 2nd surah--or "The Bee" (which is mentioned exactly once in surah 16)?  There is much in surah 4 that does not pertain to women exclusively, look at 4:16 and 4:29 for instance. A title is NOT a context, context is better provided by the surrounding ayahs.

I find the immediate context to be of marriage and relationships, not women. Bear in mind that many same sex relationships are between women. Going along with the understanding that the context of surah 4 is women should also give the understanding that same sex relationships between women are clearly allowed.

Either same sex relationships are "what is beyond this," or they are not. It seems clear that they *are* "what is beyond this," especially if they aren't addressed.

ALLAH knows best.



~Abdul-Hadi

You clearly don't understand that Arabic has a separate Feminine tense. You rely on English translations which strips the preciseness of the Arabic. 4:24, "what is beyond that" is directed at women, the wording is feminine.


FYI: In 4:16 HOMOSEXUAL activity between two men is addressed, and is to be punished. The wording is Masculine DUAL ( 2 Men, Together, having sex)..... Need I say more?



You will never find support for Same sex marriage from the Quran, Trust me I know because I looked and it is clear as day and night that God created Men for women.

[Man of Faith]

Peace,

It is dangerous to say that something should be punished by religious law. One has to research carefully. That homosexuality was made incompatible by God is obvious, but we must be careful advocating a punishment in the name of God, or we may be no better than the "hadithers" that only conjectured and, for example, created the stoning punishment and many other ones.

Just because you extract a meaning from the context based on faulty dictionaries does not warrant that it is the true interpretation. The matter with ketab and d -r - b is a reason to be wary of how words are understood in dictionaries. One may know grammar well, but it does not matter if words have been changed in meaning so that even dictionaries misrepresent them. Then it does not help even if you are an expert. We have to exert caution and apply logic and reason and also compare a root word's all applications within the discourse.

God bless you

[huruf]

FYI: In 4:16 HOMOSEXUAL activity between two men is addressed, and is to be punished. The wording is Masculine DUAL ( 2 Men, Together, having sex)..... Need I say more?

Not really. It is dual generic or masculine, it might be talking about two males or it might be talking about a male and a female. And there is no hint whatsoever that it is talking about homosexual sex. Just as there is no hint whatsoever that in the previous aya 4.15 it is talking about homosexual female sex. And why should in 4.15 be using the plural and in the next aya de dual to speak about both sexes? And say very different things?


No, there is no foundation to understand it as homosexual sex. Rather 4.15 is referring to public soliciting by prostitutes, and the next aya 4.16 is referring to the prostitute and the client. And that is related to the last part of aya 4.34 where it is talking about the nushuz of women and of the injuonction to the community of investigating about them (advice them, leave them in their places of sleeping and solve their problem).

Clearly in 4.15 four witnesses are required to determine that in fact the women are doing what the are said to be doing, and once determined tha community os commanded to take them off the street and put them in proper houses till they have another way to provide for themselves and thir families or till death. But they are not to leave in in the street to fend for themselves. And the prostitute and the client are to be shown the wrongness of their doings and helpe them to repent and stop it.

No word about homosexuality neither in 4.15 nor in 4.16. If anything is said it is just conjecture.

Prostitution is a very common thing in almost all societies. It would be surprising if the Qur'an did not say a word about it, when it is public and wellknown. Well those two ayas seem to speak about it. 


Salaam

[hawk99]

The problem that I have with using titles to define the content is that this is not done with all of the titles. Does "The Cow" give special meaning to the 2nd surah--or "The Bee" (which is mentioned exactly once in surah 16)? 

Peace Abdul-Hadi,

The titles have a wisdom for the reader 2/67-2/74, 16/68-16/69.
Please read the ayats pertaining to the titles to obtain the wisdom therein.

There is much in surah 4 that does not pertain to women exclusively, look at 4:16 and 4:29 for instance. A title is NOT a context, context is better provided by the surrounding ayahs.

True, but surah 4 is an exception and for you to miss the context of the surrounding ayats of 4/24 leaves you
with an interpolation created by you without foundation!

I find the immediate context to be of marriage and relationships, not women. Bear in mind that many same sex relationships are between women. Going along with the understanding that the context of surah 4 is women should also give the understanding that same sex relationships between women are clearly allowed.

Please provide evidence!  Can a man receive a dowry from another man?

Either same sex relationships are "what is beyond this," or they are not. It seems clear that they *are* "what is beyond this," especially if they aren't addressed.

They are not.  Using your exclusionary argument what is beyond this could be animals, statues, the ground etc.,
no, there is no "if two men decide to marry....................... or if women want to marry each other................"
these things that you propose are not found anywhere.

The context closes thusly:

4/25  And whoever among you has not within his power ampleness of means to marry free believing women, then (he may marry) of those whom your right hands possess from among your believing maidens; and Allah knows best your faith: you are (sprung) the one from the other; so marry them with the permission of their masters, and give them their dowries justly, they being chaste, not fornicating, nor receiving paramours; and when they are taken in marriage, then if they are guilty of indecency, they shall suffer half the punishment which is (inflicted) upon free women. This is for him among you who fears falling into evil; and that you abstain is better for you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

God bless

   

[TheQuranAloneRevolution]

Not really. It is dual generic or masculine, it might be talking about two males or it might be talking about a male and a female. And there is no hint whatsoever that it is talking about homosexual sex. Just as there is no hint whatsoever that in the previous aya 4.15 it is talking about homosexual female sex. And why should in 4.15 be using the plural and in the next aya de dual to speak about both sexes? And say very different things?


No, there is no foundation to understand it as homosexual sex. Rather 4.15 is referring to public soliciting by prostitutes, and the next aya 4.16 is referring to the prostitute and the client. And that is related to the last part of aya 4.34 where it is talking about the nushuz of women and of the injuonction to the community of investigating about them (advice them, leave them in their places of sleeping and solve their problem).

Clearly in 4.15 four witnesses are required to determine that in fact the women are doing what the are said to be doing, and once determined tha community os commanded to take them off the street and put them in proper houses till they have another way to provide for themselves and thir families or till death. But they are not to leave in in the street to fend for themselves. And the prostitute and the client are to be shown the wrongness of their doings and helpe them to repent and stop it.

No word about homosexuality neither in 4.15 nor in 4.16. If anything is said it is just conjecture.

Prostitution is a very common thing in almost all societies. It would be surprising if the Qur'an did not say a word about it, when it is public and wellknown. Well those two ayas seem to speak about it. 


Salaam

4:16 is about homosexual sex because:
1) It is a different punishment than Adultery (no lashes)
2) the wording of "punish/admonish them" is dual, so dual masculine figures, committing lewdness, and both dual masculine figures get punished, and IF THEY REPENT, then we are to LEAVE THEM ALONE.... Notice how the punishment should be continued  UNTIL they stop what they're doing (i.e "and IF the repent")..... this is clearly about homosexual acts because it is different than regular punishment for Zina/adultery

[huruf]

Not at all, what is being done is fahishaand that is what the Qur'an says that they are doing. It does say it. Nowhere it is said that anybody is doing anything with somebody of the same sex. Zina is one thing, fahisha is something else. May be homosexual acts can be fahisha, but by no means fahisha is synonim of homosexual acts. And here is no punishment. It is said that people should be admonised or signalled the uglyness of their doings but nowhere is a punishment alloted. If they repent you stop pointing out  what they are doing that is ugly. That is all, there is no judicial punishment for it. just as there is no judicial punishment in 4.15.

The dual has the same form whether it is a male and a female or whether it is two males. You cannot affirm from that that it is talking about two males. It might be or it might not be. If the Qur'an was talking about homosexual acts and was meaning it has the means to make it unequivocal.

Salaam   

[TheQuranAloneRevolution]

Not at all, what is being done is fahishaand that is what the Qur'an says that they are doing. It does say it. Nowhere it is said that anybody is doing anything with somebody of the same sex. Zina is one thing, fahisha is something else. May be homosexual acts can be fahisha, but by no means fahisha is synonim of homosexual acts. And here is no punishment. It is said that people should be admonised or signalled the uglyness of their doings but nowhere is a punishment alloted. If they repent you stop pointing out  what they are doing that is ugly. That is all, there is no judicial punishment for it. just as there is no judicial punishment in 4.15.

The dual has the same form whether it is a male and a female or whether it is two males. You cannot affirm from that that it is talking about two males. It might be or it might not be. If the Qur'an was talking about homosexual acts and was meaning it has the means to make it unequivocal.

Salaam

1) I stated that the punishment is DIFFERENT than Zina, but there is still a punishment for it, and a peculiar punishment because it is not the regular punishment of "zina", so here we have a different role (meaning this is NOT a heterosexual sexual misconduct  , this would be a homosexual sexual misconduct)

2) 4:16 is clearly MASCULINE and Dual, thus 2 males, check for yourself:
"Alazaan" (The two of you) is a masculine dual relative pronoun
http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=16#(4:16:1)

[huruf]

Masculine or mixed, it is a male and a female it is that same word, not a different word.

And there is no punishment.


Salaam

[TheQuranAloneRevolution]

Masculine or mixed, it is a male and a female it is that same word, not a different word.

And there is no punishment.

Salaam

1) The Punishment is Admonishing (fa2zuhoma), since this is different than regular adultery/fornication (heterosexual), therefor it is a homosexual misconduct, and the punishment is admonishment for the individual, which you have admitted when you stated, "It is said that people should be admonised or signalled the uglyness of their doings ", therefore this is a different "punishment" than for heterosexual misconduct, it is lighter, but the bottom line is, The Quran does not support nor advocate for homosexual activities

2) The words are still  4:16 is clearly Masculine and Dual, thus 2 males, :
http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=16#(4:16:1)

[huruf]

advise them or point out to them is not a punishment, it is the same kind of thig as when believers are told to enjoin other believers to do right an shun bad. It is no punishment. How much pointing out to them, seven times a day? four hundred? In front of people? alone? Advising and pointing things out to somebody is not punishing anybody. It is no ppenalty that can stretch from the moon to one milimiter.



So, please, spell which verbal from would you use to speak about two, one of them a male and one of them a female, using, of course, the dual?

Are you inventig grammar anew?

Salaam