True Islam has nothing to do with people's bad actions. Much of the information circulating about Muslims is incorrect—intended solely to tarnish Islam's image—and is believed only by the brainwashed and those harboring Islamophobia.
At its essence, Sharia calls for benefit, balance, and beauty in human conduct - values every society can recognize.
The fear of Sharia in the West isn't really about religion - it's about perception.When political rhetoric and media distortion overshadow understanding, a moral framework rooted in mercy and justice is reduced to a caricature.
If there's one takeaway, it's this: Sharia is not a threat to modernity. It is a call - to conscience, compassion, and community.
Perhaps it's time to stop fearing the word, and start understanding the wisdom behind it.
Many people, especially many Islamophobes, think that Sharia means that a woman must sit at home, be covered from head to toe in black, . Whatever is done by ISIS and such is not Sharia.
As a Muslim, yes, I would prefer that Islam would spread to every part in my country. And as a consequence, also Sharia. The correct Sharia not the "Sharia" that is presented in media.
Muslims in western countries still follow sharia. People often think of sharia as Islamic criminal law, but that's probably less that 5% of the body of sharia. Most of what Muslims call sharia describes codified beliefs, personal and business ethics, how to pray, how much tax to pay on agricultural machinery, how to divide inheritance, yada, yada, yada.
And you know what? Muslims are probably more pious and diligent in their religious observances in the absence of legally mandated sharia. Take the issue of hijab as an example. When women choose to wear it of their own volition, that's an act of ibadah (i.e., religious piety).
Sharia law equally applies to those who choose to follow it or just because someone happens to follow it. Sharia law can define foods as forbidden or allowed. Sharia law can define times to fast or abstain from meat. Sharia law can define when someone may get marrried or when their marriage is forbidden. The "laws" of Sharia law are not civil laws which apply to everyone. Sharia laws and civil laws can coexist.
Rather than trying to overtake Western legal systems, Sharia law in the West operates as a voluntary, faith-based guide for Muslims. Claims of Islamic legal dominance are rooted more in fear than fact. Islamic legal system has coexisted peacefully with other traditions for centuries.
In truth, the Qur’anic legal system and Western codes can complement each other in pluralistic societies when framed around shared values like justice, fairness, and human dignity.
There are many religious duties for a Muslim who lives in the West. Being a minority, Muslims living in the West cannot demand for the application of Shari`ah. It is, however, their duty to call the Westerners to Islam. Also, Muslims living in the West can demand that in family affairs like marriage, divorce and estate division, they want Shari`ah to be applied. Furthermore, they can call for anything that benefits the whole society such as banning abortion, homosexuality and lesbianism or the like.
watch on youtube
WHY THE WEST IS COMING TO ISLAM? | LECTURE + Q & A | DR ZAKIR NAIK
Follow the constitution or Sharia law ? Dr. Zakir naik
SHARIA LAW, BORRIS JOHNSON & IMRAN KHAN - ADNAN RASHID
Polygamy is a topic that sparks intense debate among Christians and Muslims worldwide. But what does the Bible and the Quran truly say about it? In this eye-opening video, we explore polygamy’s place in Islam and Christianity, referencing key scriptures from the Quran (Surah An-Nisa 4:3) and the Bible (Isaiah 4:1, Deuteronomy 21:15-17). Is monogamy a Western construct? Did prophets like Solomon and David practice polygamy? And why is celibacy not part of God's command?
watch on youtube
Polygamy in Islam & Christianity: The Truth No One Talks About!
Why is a Man allowed to Marry 4 Wives in Islam? - Dr Zakir Naik
Are Christians allowed to have more than one wife Polygamy in Christianity Ahmed Deedat
Hirabah in Islamic law is the severe crime of open armed violence, banditry, or terrorism that disrupts public security and threatens social order.
Definition and Nature of the Crime
Waging War: Scholars describe hirabah as waging war against society or spreading corruption in the land (fasad fil-ard).
Open Force: It involves individuals or groups using weapons openly to terrorize people, take property by force, cause injury, or commit murder.
Scope: Classically, jurists defined it as highway robbery. Today, many scholars also apply it to modern acts of violent crime, organized crime, and terrorism.
Scriptural Basis
The rules and punishments for hirabah come directly from the Quran in Surah Al-Ma'idah (5:33).
It is classified as a hudd crime, meaning the punishments are fixed by religious text and do not change based on a judge's personal opinion.
Fixed Punishments (Hudud)
The punishment scales depending on what the offenders actually did during the crime:
If they killed someone and stole property: The punishment is execution followed by public crucifixion.
If they killed someone but did not steal: The punishment is execution only, without crucifixion.
If they stole property but did not kill: The punishment is the amputation of the right hand and the left foot.
If they only terrorized or threatened people without killing or stealing: The punishment is banishment, exile, or imprisonment until they repent.
watch on youtube
The Ethical Foundation of the Sharia (Islamic Law) | Imam Zaid Shakir
Objectives of Shariah: A Quranic Perspective by Nouman Ali Khan
Sharia Law in 8 Minutes | Snapshots with Imam Tom Facchine
The Islamic Laws of War with Dr. Ahmed Al-Dawoody
Women's Rights in Islam Protected Or Subjugated? - Dr. Zakir Naik
Women's Right In Islam Compared to Judaism and Christianity #HUDATV
Christians claim that in the birth of Jesus, there occurred the miracle of the incarnation of God in the form of a human being. To say that God became truly a human being invites a number of questions. Let us ask the following about the man-God Jesus. What happened to his foreskin after his circumcision (Luke 2:21)?
Did it ascend to heaven, or did it decompose as with any human piece of flesh? During his lifetime what happened to his hair, nails, and blood shed from wounds? Did the cells of his body die as in ordinary human beings? If his body did not function in a truly human way, he could not be truly human as well as truly God. Yet, if his body functioned exactly in a human way, this would nullify any claim to divinity. It would be impossible for any part of God, even if incarnate, to decompose in any way and still be considered God. The everlasting, one God, in whole or in part, does not die, disintegrate, or decompose: ‘For I the Lord do not change.’ (Malachi 3:6)
Did Jesus’ flesh dwell in safety after his death?
Unless Jesus’ body never underwent ‘decay’ during his lifetime he could not be God, but if it did not undergo ‘decay’ then he was not truly human.
The impossibility of incarnation
(Genesis 6:3)
3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with[a] humans forever, for they are mortal
This denies incarnation
? Timothy 1 * 6:16
16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.
The impossibility of the incarnation because God was not seen by anyone
Romans 1:23
23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
: Romans 1:25
25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
All texts confirm the impossibility of the incarnation, because it is a lie and a fabrication against God and a shame for people
By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me.
◄ John 5:30 ►
The text is clear, Christ cannot do anything on his own, why?? Because he is waiting for an order from the father who sent him
22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
But we find that the Christian knows nothing about his book
Was Christ lying when he said?
29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife[a] or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.
Matthew (19:29)
That is, one who leaves a woman (wife). Ascetic in this world for the sake of Christ
He will receive a hundredfold from women in the afterlife
Your interpretations are nothing but hallucinations—much like those of Paul.
The verse clearly indicates the existence of *hur al-ayn* (fair-eyed companions) in Christianity, according to the words of Christ.
In Christianity, marriage in the afterlife is prohibited; this points to a contradiction in your scripture. How, then, can it allow for *hur al-ayn* while forbidding marriage?
If you claim that the Kingdom is a spiritual one and that eternal life is purely spiritual, then why are houses, fields, women, and parents mentioned—followed by the inheritance of eternal life (i.e., immortality within it)?
Are the houses and fields in the Kingdom also meant to be understood as spiritual metaphors?
That is the first point.
Furthermore... is eating and drinking permissible, while marriage is forbidden? How can that be?
watch on youtube
Do Muslims get 72 Virgins in Paradise? - Dr Zakir Naik - ...
If men receive houris (hoor al ayn) in Paradise, what will women receive? - Assim al hakeem
Reply with quote