Muslims cite the Old Testament as an equivalent for their savage punishments, but isn't that crazy?

Question

The Old Testament "eye for an eye" style of punishment has been done away with in the largely christian west, following the rise of proper legal process, humane treatment, human rights, and inicreasing secularisation (thank christ!) of society. But what the muslims are practising in some countries is barbaric and uncivilised, and they want to enforce this sharia everywhere. Shouldn't we make sure that never happens?

Hey ?? - we are on the same wavelength

Dewcoons, my point was not on the nature of "eye for an eye" - I understand my law very well, thank you. My point was that Nuslims use Old Testament rules and censures as an excuse for being brutal and backward, as if we were still applying those Old Testament laws, which we aren't.

Submission for salvation, thanks - who said I was a christian?

Answer 1

One must understand there is a common misconception about an "eye for eye"

The teaching is NOT for revenge it is for equal punishment to match the crime. Thus preventing excess retribution.

Answer 2

Why is it that people have not clue what "an eye for an eye" means? If you go back and look at where it was originally said (Exodus 21:24), it is saying that a judge should not impose a sentence that is extreme or cruel. Such as, if a man causes you to lose an eye or a tooth, they should not be executed for that. The punishment for the lose of an eye shouls be no more extreme then the lose of their own eye. Gilbert and Sullivan said it well, "Let the punishment fit the crime, let the punishment fit the crime".

The principle of "an eye for an eye" - or "the punishment should fit the crime" is the backbone of western law. It has not been "replaced" by more "civilized" and "modern" laws, rather it is the source of the modern, civilized, legal system. It is the reason we are not a barbaric culture in which people are executed or maimed for the slightest offense.

Answer 3

Muslims cite the Old Testament to show how similar it is to Christianity and Judaism. "Eye for an eye" originally came about because people were going overboard and doing excesses like "all your children for an eye," so historically, this law limited conflict to equal revenge. Islam is better than that, because it strongly encourages you to forgive rather than seek punishment in the name of justice.

To answer the rest of your question/accusation, as a Muslim I strongly support a proper legal process, humane treatment, and human rights. I don't think the so-called "Islamic law" in the dictatorship countries counts for anything, as they are un-Islamic and under the control of those dicators.

As a Muslim, I want to see my religious rules enforced using proper sharia; like stopping people who don't like their baby's gender from having an abortion, but I know that Saudi Arabia's laws are NOT actual sharia. I'm just as outraged at their actions as you. If sharia could be implemented correctly according to Islam and with justice and mercy, then you wouldn't have such terrible examples in places like that.

Answer 4

Yes! That's what I keep saying! Traditional Judeo-Christian law is NO better than Islamic law, but it DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE. It has been modernized and secularized in virtually every corner of the globe and there's not a country on earth that follows it, not even Israel. This is the opposite of Islam. The Sharee'ah is practiced in Islamic countries such as Afghanistan, Libya, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, the Gulf states, the Palestinian Authority, Yemen, and others, and has a powerful influence on supposedly secular states such as Egypt and Syria. To date, the ONLY secular democracy in the world with a Muslim majority is Turkey. Muslims, in their insistence that all of Islam's beliefs and practices are PERFECT, refuse to acknowledge this, and so the mentality doesn't change. IF Islam were modernized and secularized, and IF it came to respect all the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, I would have no problem with it, but that's not going to happen anytime soon, at least not within our own lifetimes.

Answer 5

Yes, this little story illustrates how I feel about this:

Three strangers strike up a conversation in the airport passenger lounge in Bozeman, Montana, while awaiting their respective flights. One is an American Indian passing through from Lame Deer. Another is a Cowboy on his way to Billings for a livestock show, and the third passenger is a fundamentalist Arab student, newly arrived at Montana State University from the Middle East. Their discussion drifts to their diverse cultures. Soon, the two Westerners learn that the Arab is a devout, radical Muslim and the conversation falls into an uneasy lull. The cowboy leans back in his chair, crosses his boots on a magazine table and tips his big sweat-stained hat forward over his face. The wind outside is blowing tumbleweeds around, and the old windsock is flapping; but still no plane comes. Finally, the American Indian clears his throat and softly he speaks, "At one time here, my people were many, but sadly, now we are few."The Muslim student raises an eyebrow and leans forward, "Once my people were few," he sneers, "and now we are many. Why do you suppose that is?" The Montana cowboy shifts his toothpick to one side of his mouth and from the darkness beneath his Stetson says in a smooth drawl, "That's 'cause we ain't played Cowboys and Muslims yet, but I do believe it's a-comin'.

Answer 6

What if the old testament was just a record of the crimes that man commited, and seemingly, got away with?
Man got away with everything in the old testament. Say, the prophets recorded the crimes for future people, so they would know what a devil that man really was.
I think that people who cite the old testament as licence to do whatever they want, are doing the works of thier Father the "Devil".

Answer 7

I agree with ?? above.
it is laughable that some christians try and use 'bits' of OT laws about things they dislike and ignore equivalent laws about things they dont care about (for example; the word for abomination - to'evah - is used rarely in the OT, 2 things which are specifically "to'eveh" are male homosexuality and eating shellfish - have you hade a shrimp cocktail recently?)

Answer 8

actually there are verses in the new testament condemning homosexuality some are in matthew and also who says we disregard the old testament christian common law is in the old testament the 10 commandments christians are to obey those no matter what

Answer 9

Yes it is crazy - the difference is that in islam they still carry out these barbaric acts NOW, in the 21st century.

Look at the hanging of saddam for a start, the beheadings and amputations etc

Answer 10

Who are you to judge another person's beliefs? let them do that for themselves if they feel the need to

Just like who am I to judge your beliefs? Just because I disagree with you on something we couldn't make sure you never do something, and you are confused and misunderstanding a great deal what is actually going on.